Repiiblicanism  vs.  Graiitism. 


THE  FRESIDEXCY  A  TRUST;  NOT  A  PLAYTHING  AND  PERQUISITE. 


Personal  Government  cand  Presidential  Pretensions. 


REFORM  AND  PURITY  IN  GOVERNMENT. 


SPEECH 


OF 


HON.  CHARLES  SUMNER, 


OF  ]S1A.SSA.CE[XJSETTS, 


DELIVEKED 


IN  THE  SENATE   OF   THE  UiS'ITED  STATES, 


MAT  31,  1872. 


"  Fofrntes.  Thon  whom  do  you  call  the  good  ? 
Al  rib  in  (Us..  I  uiean  by  the  good  iliose  who  are  able  to  rule  in  the  city. 
Soo-ntetf.  Not,  sural j'.  over  horses? 
AlcUiiddex.  Certiinly  not. 
So'-i-ntoN.  But  (ivcr  men  ? 
Alcibiades.  Yes.'' 

{Plato,  Dialogues.    Tlie  First  Alcibiades. 

"  Amoner  the  foremost  purnoses  ou!?ht  to  be  the  diwifill  of  this  odious,  insultin?.  dsgradinor.  aide-de- 
campi.-^h,  incnr)nbln  dictatorship.  At  such  .i  crisis  is  tlio  oountrv  to  bo,  left,  at  the  'neroy  of  b  irr.iek  cc  iuci  is 
and mes<-rooin  politic.-?'' — Letter  of  Lord  D.cr-luiinto  Ileiirij  Broughain,  Aug.,  IS'SJ.  Brougkaiii'a  Life  and 
Timea^Yol.  iii,  p.  44. 


WASHINGTON: 
F.  &  J.  RfVES  &  GEO.  A.  BATLEY, 

REPORTERS  AND  PRINflEllS  OF  r;iE  D33ATEi  OJ?  CONGRESS 
1872. 


0 


Avery  Architectural  and  Fine  Arts  Library 
Gift  of  Seymour  B.  Durst  Old  York  Library 


"It  ia  a  maxim  in  politics  which  -we  rendily  admit  as  tindi?ptited  and  universal,  that  a  power,  however 
great,  when  gr;inted  by  law  to  an  eminent  matristrate,  i.«  not  so  dnnfferou>  to  liberty  as  an  nuthority,  how- 
ever inconsider:ible.  which  he  acquires  frum  violence  and  usurpation."— Z/ame'*  Eauaya,  Fart  11,  No.  10,  of 
$ome  remarkable  vustuina. 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arcliive 
in  2013 


http://archive.org/details/republicanismvsgOOsunnn_0 


SPEECH. 


The  sundry  civil  appropriation  bill  coming  up  as 
unfini.shiHl  business.  Mr.  Scmner  moved  to  postpone 
inaetiuitely  its  consideration,  and  after  remarking 
on  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  the  Sale  of  Arms 
to  French  agents,  proceeded: 

Mr.  President:  I  have  no  hpsitation  in 
declaring  myself  a  member  of  the  Republican 
party  and  one  of  the  straitest  of  the  sect.  I 
doubt  ifany  Snnator  can  pointto  earlier  or  more 
constant  service  in  its  behalf.    I  began  at  the 
beginning,  and  from  tliat  early  day  have  never 
failed  to  sustain  its  candidates  and  to  advance  i 
its   principles.     For   these  1  have  labored  J 
always  by  speech  and  vote,  in  the  Senate 
and  elsewhere,  at  first  with  few  only,  but  at 
last  as  success  began  to  dawn  then  wiih  mul- 
titudes flocking  lorward.     In   this  cause  I 
never  asked  who  were  my  associates  or  how 
many  they  would  number.    In  the  conscious- 
ness of  right  1  was  willing  to  be  alone.    To  I 
such  a  party,  with  which  so  much  of  my  life 
is  intertwined,  I  have  no  common  attachment. 
Not  witliout  regret  can  1  see  it  sutfer;  not  ; 
without  a  pang  can  I  see  it  changed  from  its  I 
origii.ci  character,  for  such  a  change  is  death,  i 
Therefore  do  I  ask,  with  no  common  feeling, 
that  the  peril  which  menaces  it  may  pass 
away.     I  stood  by  its   cradle;    let  me  not 
follow  its  hearse. 

ORIGIN'  AXD  OBJECT  OP  THE  REPUBLICAN  PARTY. 

Turning  back  to  its  birth,  I  recall  a  speech 
of  my  own  at  a  State  convention  in  Massa- 
chusetts, as  early  as  September  7,  1854,  where 
I  vindicated  its  principles  and  announced  its 
name  in  these  words:  ''As  Uepublicaxs 
we  go  forth  to  eticonnter  the  Oligarchs  of 
Slavery. The  report  records  the  applause 
wiih  which  this  name  was  received  by  the 
excited  multitude.  Years  of  conflict  ensued, 
in  which  the  good  cause  constantly  gained,  j 
At  last,  in  the  summer  of  1860,  Alirahatn 
Lincoln  was  nominated  by  this  party  as  its 
candidate  for  the  Presidency  ;  and  here  par- 
don me  if  1  refer  again  to  myself.    On  my  way 


home  from  the  Senate  I  was  detained  in  Nevr 
York  by  the  invitation  of  party  friends  to 
speak  at  tl)e  Coo[)er  Institute  on  the  issues  of 
the  pending  election.  The  speech  was  made 
July  12,  and,  I  believe,  was  the  earliest  of 
the  campaign.  As  published  at  the  time  it 
was  entitled  ''Origin,  Necessity,  and  Perma- 
nence of  the  Republican  Party."  and  to  ex- 
hibit these  was  its  precise  object.  Both  the 
necessity  and  permanence  of  ihe  party  were 
asserted.  A  briel'  pass  ige.  which  1  take  from 
the  report  in  the  New  York  Herald,  will  show 
the  duty  and  destiny  I  ventured  then  to  hold 
up.  Alter  dwelling  on  the  evils  of  vSlavery  and 
the  corruptions  it  had  engetidered,  including 
the  purchase  of  votes  at  the  polls,  I  proceeded 
as  follows  : 

'*  Therefore  just  so  long  as  the  present  false  theories 
of  Slavery  prevail ,  whether  ooncerniug  its  ch  aracter 
morally,  economic:iliy,  aii'l  socially,  or  concerning 
its  prerogatives  under  the  Coiistirution.  just  so  hjo? 
as  the  Slave  Oiii^arehy.  whicii  is  the  sleepless  and 
unhesitating  agent  ot  Slavery  in  all  its  pretensions, 
coininuesio  exist  as  a  political  power,  the  Repub- 
lican party  must  endure.  [  Applau^*^.]  Il  b.id  men  con- 
spire for  Slavery,  g  iod  men  must  ombiiie  fur  Free- 
dom. ["Good,  good  !']  N-r  cm  the  holy  war  l)e  ended 
until  the  barbarism  now  dominant  in  the  Republic 
is  overthrown  and  the  P.ig  in  |)ower  is  driven  irom 
our  Jerusalem.  [Applaus-^.]  And  when  the  trium{>h 
is  won, securing  the  immediate  obiect  of  our  organ- 
ization, the  RepubliCiin  parry  wiit  not  die,  but  puri- 
fied by  long  contest  with  Slavery  and  filled  with 
higher  lite,  it  will  be  lilted  to  yet  other  etf  )rts  with 
nobler  aims  for  the  good  of  man.  [Applause,  three 
cheers  for  Lincoln.]" 

Such,  on  the  eve  of  the  presidential  election, 
was  my  description  of  the  Republican  party 
and  my  aspiration  for  its  fu"ure.  It  was  not 
to  die,  but  purified  by  lon^  contest  with 
Slavery  and  filled  with  higher  life,  we  were 
to  behold  it  lifted  to  yet  other  elF»rts  with 
nobler  aims  for  the  good  o  man.  Here  was 
nothing  personal,  nothing  m  -an  or  p^'ty.  Tiie 
Republican  party  was  nece^3ary  and  perma- 
nent, and  always  on  an  asoeuding  pUme.  For 
such  a  party  there  was  no  deatn,  but  higher 
life  and  nobler  aims;  and  this  was  the  party 
to  which  I  give  my  vows.      But  alas!  hovr 


6 


cbiiiiged.  Once  country  was  the  object,  and 
not  li  man  ;  once  princi()le  was  inscribed  on 
the  viciorious  banners,  and  not  a  name  only. 

REPUBLICAN  PARTY  SEIZED  BY  THE  PRESIDENT. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  indicate  wlien  this  disas- 
trous clian^e,  exuliitii;  the  will  of  one  man 
above  all  else,  became  not  merely  manifest  but 
painluliy  conspicuous.  Alrea<iy  it  had  begun 
to  show  itselfin  personal  pretensions,  to  which 
1  shall  refer  sootj,  when  sudilenly  and  without 
any  warninir  through  the  publi«  |:)ress  or  any 
expression  from  public  opinion,  the  President, 
elected  by  the  Kepul)lican  party  precipitated 
upon  the  country  an  ill-cot)sidered  and  ill- 
omened  scheme  lor  the  annexion  of  a  portion 
of  ihe  island  of  St  Domingo,  in  pursuance  of 
a  treaty  negotiated  by  a  person  of  his  own 
household  styling  himself  "  Aid-de-Camp  of 
the  President  of  the  United  States."  Had 
this  eifort,  however  injudicious  in  object,  been 
conlined  to  ordinary  and  constitutional  pro- 
ceedings, with  proper  regard  (or  a  coordinate 
branch  of  the  Government,  it  would  have  soon 
dropped  out  ofsight  and  been  remembered  only 
as  a  blunder.  Bul  it  was  not  so.  Strangely 
and  unaccountably,  it  was  pressed  for  months 
by  every  means  and  appliance  of  power, 
whether  at  home  or  abroai],  now  reaching  into 
the  Senate  Chamber,  and  now  into  the  waters 
about  the  island.  Reluctant  Senators  were 
subdued  to  its  support,  while,  treading  under 
foot  the  Constitut  ion  in  one  of  its  most  dis 
tinctive  republican  principles,  the  President 
seized  the  war  powers  of  the  nation,  instituted 
foreign  intervention,  and  capped  the  climax 
of  usurpation  by  metiace  of  violence  to  the 
Black  Republic  of  Hayii,  where  the  colored 
race  have  commenced  tlie  expeiicnent  of  self- 
government,  thus  adding  manifest  outrage  of 
International  Law  to  manifest  outrage  of  the 
Constitution,  while  the  long-suffering  African 
was  condemned  to  new  indignity.  All  these 
thirtgs.  so  utterly  indefensible  and  aggravating, 
and  therefore  to  be  promptly  disowned,  Ibund 
defenders  on  this  floor.  The  President,  who 
was  the  original  author  of  the  wrongs,  contin- 
ued to  mairjtain  them,  and  appealed  to  Repub 
lican  Senators  for  lielp,  thus  fulhlling  the 
eccentric  stipulation  v^itli  the  Government  of 
Baez,  executed  by  his  Aid  de-Camp. 

At,  last  a  Republican  Senator,  who  felt  it  his 
duty  to  exhibit  these  plain  violations  of  the 
Constitution  and  of  International  Law,  and 
then  in  obedience  to  the  irresistible  prompt- 
ings of  his  nature,  and  in  harmony  with  his 
whole  life,  pleaded  for  the  equal  rights  of  the 
Black  Republic — who  declared  that  he  did  this 
as  a  Republican,  and  to  save  the  party  from 
this  wretched  complicity — this  Republican 
Senator,  engaged  in  a  patriotic  service,  and 
anxious  to  tave  the  colored  fieople  from  out- 
rag^^,  wiis  denounced  on  this  floor  as  a  traitor 
to  the  party,  and  this  was  done  by  a  Senator 


speaking  for  the  party,  and  known  to  be  in 
intimate  relations  with  the  President  guilty  of 
these  wrongs.  Evidently  the  party  was  ia 
process  of  change  from  that  generous  asso- 
ciation dedicated  to  Human  Rights  and  to  the 
guardianship  of  the  African  race.  Too  plainly 
it  was  becoming  the  instrument  of  one  man 
and  his  personal  will,  no  matter  how  much  he 
set  at  deliance  the  Constitution  attd  Interna- 
tional Law,  or  how  much  he  insulted  the  col- 
ored people.  The  President  was  lo  be  main- 
tained at  all  hazards,  notwithstatiding  his 
aberrations,  and  all  who  called  them  iu  ques- 
tion were  to  be  struck  down. 

In  exhibiting  this  autocratic  pretension,  so 
revolutionary  and  unrepublican  in  character, 
I  mean  to  be  moderate  iti  language  and  to  keep 
within  the  strictest  bounds.  The  facts  are  in- 
disputable, and  nobody  can  deny  the  gross 
violation  of  me  Constitution  and  of  Inter- 
national Law  with  insult  to  the  Black  Re[)ub- 
lic — the  whole  case  being  more  reprehensi- 
ble, as  also  plainly  more  unconstitutional  and 
more  illegal  than  anything  alleged  against 
Andrew  Johnson  on  his  impeachment.  Be- 
lieve me,  sir,  I  should  gladly  leave  this  matter 
to  the  judgment  already  recorded,  if  it  were 
not  put  in  issue  again  by  the  extraordinary 
efforts,  radiating  on  every  line  of  office,  to 
press  its  author  for  a  second  term  as  Pres- 
ident; and  since  silence  gives  consent,  all 
these  efforts  are  his  efforts.  They  become 
more  noteworthy  when  it  is  considered  that 
the  name  of  the  candidate  thus  pressed  has 
become  a  sigti  of  discord  and  not  of  concord, 
dividing  instead  of  uniting  the  Republican 
party,  so  that  these  extraordinary  efforts  tend 
directly  to  the  disruption  of  the  parfy,  all  of 
which  he  witnesses  and  again  by  his  silence 
raiihes.  "Let  the  party  split,"  says  the  Pres- 
ident, "I  will  not  renounce  my  chance  of  a 
second  term."  The  extent  of  this  personal 
pressure  atid  the  subordination  of  the  party  to 
the  will  of  an  individual  compel  us  to  consider 
his  pretensions.    These,  too,  are  in  issue. 

PRESIDENTIAL  PRETENSIONS. 

"  On  what  meat  doth  this  our  Cassar  feed" 
that  he  should  assume  so  much?  No  honor 
for  victory  in  war  can  justify  disobedience  to 
the  Constitution  and  to  law;  nor  can  it  afford 
the  least  apology  lor  any  personal  immunity, 
privilege,  or  license  in  the  presidential  office. 
A  President  must  turn  into  a  king  before  it 
can  be  said  of  iiim  that  he  can  do  no  wrong. 
He  is  responsible  always.  As  President  he 
is  foremost  servant  of  the  law,  bound  to  obey 
its  slightest  mandate.  As  the  elect  of  the  peo- 
ple he  owes  not  only  the  example  of  willing 
obedience,  but  also  of  fidelity  and  industry 
in  the  discharge  of  his  exalted  office  with  an 
abso'ute  abnegation  of  all  se'f  seeking  Notb~ 
ing  for  self  hut  all  for  country.  And  now,  as 
we  regard  the  career  of  this  candidate,  we 


find  to  our  amazement  how  little  it  accords 
with  this  simple  requirement.  Bring  it  to  the 
touchstone  and  it  fails. 

Not  only  are  Constitution  and  law  disre- 
garded, but  the  presidential  office  itself  is 
treated  as  little  more  than  a  plaything  and  a 

f)erquisite — when  not  the  former  then  the 
atter.  Here  the  details  are  ample;  showing 
how  from  the  beginning  this  august  trust  has 
dropped  to  be  a  personal  indulgence,  where 
palace  cars,  fast  horses,  and  sea-side  loiterings 
figure  more  than  duties  ;  how  personal  aims 
and  objects  have  been  more  prominent  than 
the  public  interests  ;  how  the  presidential 
office  has  been  used  to  advance  his  own  family 
on  a  scale  of  nepotism  dwarfing  everything 
of  the  kind  in  our  history  and  hardly  equaled 
in  the  corrupt  governments  where  this  abuse 
has  most  prevailed;  how  in  the  same  spirit 
office  has  been  conferred  upon  those  from  whom 
he  had  received  gifts  or  benefits,  thus  making 
the  country  repay  his  personal  obligations  ;  how 
personal  devotion  to  himself  rather  than  pub 
lie  or  party  service  has  been  made  the  stand- 
ard of  favor;  how  the  vast  appointing  power 
conferred  by  the  Constitution  for  the  general 
welfare  has  been  employed  at  his  will  to  pro- 
mote his  schemes,  to  reward  his  friends,  to  pun 
ish  his  opponents,  and  to  advance  his  election 
to  a  second  term  ;  how  all  these  assumptions 
have  matured  in  a  personal  government^  semi- 
military  in  character  and  breathing  ihe  mili- 
tary spirit,  being  a  species  of  Caesarism  or 
personalism,  abhorrent  to  republican  institu- 
tions, where  subservience  to  the  President  is  the 
supreme  law ;  how  in  maintaining  this  subserv- 
ience he  has  operated  by  a  system  of  combin- 
ations, military,  political,  and  even  senatorial, 
having  their  orbns  about  him,  so  that,  like  the 
planet  Saturn,  he  is  surrounded  by  rings  ;  nor 
does  the  similitude  end  here,  f»r  his  rings, 
like  those  of  the  planet,  are  held  in  position 
by  satellites  ;  how  this  utterly  unrepublican 
Cjesarism  has  mastered  the  Republican  party 
and  dictated  the  presidential  will,  stalking 
into  the  Senate  Chamber  itself,  while  a  vin- 
dictive spirit  visits  good  Republicans  who 
cannot  submit;  how  the  President  himself, 
unconscious  that  a  President  has  no  right  to 
quarrel  wiih  anybody,  insists  upon  quarreling 
until  he  has  become  the  great  presidential 
quarreler,  with  more  quarrels  than  all  other 
Presidents  together,  all  begun  and  contin- 
ued by  himself;  how  his  personal  followers 
back  him  in  quarrels,  insult  those  he  insults, 
and  then,  not  departing  from  his  spirit,  cry 
out  with  Shakspeare,  We  will  have  rings 
and  things  and  tine  array;"  and  finally,  how 
the  chosen  head  of  the  Republic  is  known 
chiefly  for  presideniinl  pretensions,  utteily 
indefensible  in  character,  deroiiatory  to  the 
country  and  of  evil  influence,  making  personal 
objects  a  primary  pursuit,  so  that  instead  of 
a  beueiiceut  presence  he  is  a  bad  example 


through  whom  Republican  institutions  suffer 
and  the  people  learn  to  do  wrong. 

Would  that  these  things  could  be  forgotten, 
but  since  through  officious  friends  the  Pres- 
ident insists  upon  a  second  term  they  must 
be  considered  and  publicly  discussed.  When 
understood  nobody  will  vindicate  them.  It  is 
easy  to  see  that  Czesarism  even  in  Europe  is  at 
a  discount ;  that  "personal  government"  has 
been  beaten  on  that  ancie^it  field,  and  that 
"  Cgesar  with  a  senate  at  his  heels"  is  not 
the  fit  model  for  our  Republic.  King  George 
J II  of  England,  so  peculiar  for  narrowness 
and  obstinacy,  had  retainers  in  Parliament 
who  went  under  the  name  of  "The  King's 
Friends."  Nothing  can  be  allowed  here  to 
justify  the  inquiry,  "  Have  we  a  King  George 
among  us?"  or  that  other  question,  "Have 
we  a  party  in  the  Senate  of  'the  King's 
Friends?'  " 

PERSONAL  OOVKRXMKXT  UNREPUBLICAN. 

Personal  government  is  autocratic.  It  is 
the  One  Man  Power  elevated  above  all  else, 
and  is,  therefore,  in  direct  conflict  with  re- 
publican government,  whose  consummate  form 
is  tripartite,  being  Execuiive,  Legisla'ive,  and 
Judicial ;  each  independent  and  coequal.  From 
Mr.  Madison,  in  the  Federalist,  we  learn  that 
the  accumulation  of  these  powers  "  in  the  same 
hands"  may  justly  be  pronounc^^d  "the  very 
definition  of  tyraiiny."  And  so  any  attempt 
by  either  to  exercise  powers  of  another  is  a 
tyrannical  invasion  always  reprehensible  in 
proportion  to  its  extent.  John  Adams  tells 
us  in  most  instructive  words  that  "  it  is  by 
balancing  each  of  the-e  powers  against  the 
other  two  that  the  efforts  iti  hutnan  nature 
toward  tyranny  can  alone  be  checked  and 
restriiined,  and  any  degree  of  freedom  pre- 
served in  the  Consiituiion."  {John  Adams'' s 
Works,  Vol.  IV,  p.  186.) 

Then,  again,  the  same  au'hority  says  that 
the  perlectioi!  of  this  great  idea  is  "  by  giving 
each  division  a  power  to  defend  itself  by  a 
negative."  {Ibid.,  page  2;)G  )  In  other  words, 
each  is  armed  against  invasion  by  the  others. 
Accordingly,  the  constitution  of  Virginia, 
in  1776,  famous  as  an  historical  precedent, 
declared  expressly  : 

*'  The  legislative,  executive,  and  judiciary  depart- 
ments shall  be  separate  and  distinct,  so  that  neii  her 
exercise  the  powers  properh  belonging  to  the  otlier  ; 
nor  shall  any  person  execucc  tne  powers  of  more 
than  one  of  them  at  the  same  time." 

The  constitution  of  Massachusetts,  dating 
from  1780,"  embodied  the  same  principle  ia 
memorable  words : 

"  The  legislative  department  shall  never  exercise 
the  executive  and  judicial  powers,  or  either  of 
them;  the  executive  shai I  never  exercise  t he  legis- 
lative and  judicial  powers,  or  either  ot  them;  the 
judicial  shall  never  exercise  the  legislative  and 
executive  powers,  or  either  of  thein,  to  th  ■  end  that 
it  may  be  a  government  of  laws  and  not  of  men." 

A  government  of  laws  and  not  of  men  is  the 


8 


object  of  republican  government;  nay  more, 
it  is  ibe  distinctive  essence  without  which  ii 
becomes  a  tyranny,  i  lieterbre,  personal  gov- 
ernmeiiL  in  ail  iis  forms,  and  especially  when 
it  seeks  fo  sway  the  action  of  any  other  branch 
or  overturn  its  co^'Siiiutioiial  negative,  is  lios- 
tile  to  the  Krst  principles  of. republican  ins'i 
tu'ions,  and  an  unquestionable  outrage.  That 
our  President  has  offended  in  this  way  is 
Tiuha])pily  too  apparent. 

THE  PRESIDENT  AS  A  CIVILIAN. 

To  comprehend  the  personal  government 
that  has  been  installed  over  us  we  must  know 
its  author  His  picture  is  the  necessary 
frontispiece;  not  us  soldier,  let  it  be  borne  in 
mind,  but  i\s  civilian.  The  President  is  titular 
head  of  the  Army  and  Navy  of  the  United 
States:  but  his  office  is  not  military  or  naval. 
As  it  to  exclude  all  question,  he  is  classed  by 
the  Constitution  among  ''civil  officers." 
Therefore  as  civilian  is  he  to  be  seen.  Then, 
perhaps,  may  we  learn  the  secret  of  the  policy 
so  adverse  to  republicanism  in  which  he 
perseveres. 

To  appreciate  his  peculiar  character  as  a 
civilian  it  is  important  to  know  his  triumphs 
as  a  soldier,  for  the  one  is  the  natural  com- 
plement of  the  ottier.  The  successful  soldier 
is  rarely  changed  to  the  successful  civilian. 
There  seems  an  incompatibility  between  the 
two,  modihed  by  the  extent  to  which  one  has 
been  allowed  to  exclude  the  other.  One 
always  a  so.dier  cannot  lare  in  life  become  a 
statesiuHu;  one  aUvays  a  civilian  cannot  late 
in  life  become  a  soldier.  Education  and  expe 
rience  are  tietdetl  for  each.  Wa-hington  and 
Jackson  were  civilians  as  well  as  soldiers. 

In  the  large  training  and  experience  of 
antiquity  the  soldier  and  civilian  were  often 
united:  but  in  modern  times  this  has  been 
seldom.  The  camp  is  peculiar  in  the  influence 
it  exei  ci='es:  it  is  in  itself  an  education  :  but  it 
is  not  the  education  of  the  statesman.  To 
suppose  that  we  can  change  without  prepara- 
tion from  the  solJier  to  the  statesman  is  to 
assume  that  training  and  experience  are  of 
less  consequence  for  the  one  than  the  other — 
that  a  man  may  by  born  a  statesman  but  can 
fit  himself  as  a  soidier  only  by  four  years  at 
"West  Point,  careful  scientific  study,  the  cona- 
mand  of  troops,  and  experience  in  the  tented 
field.  And  is  notliing  required  for  the  states- 
man? Is  his  duty  so  slight?  His  study  is  the 
nation  and  its  welfare,  turning  always  to  his- 
tory for  example,  to  law  for  autiiority.  and  to 
the  lofiipst  truth  for  rules  of  conduct.  No 
knowledge,  care,  or  virtue,  disciidined  by 
habit,  can  be  too  great.  The  pilot  is  not 
accepted  in  ids  trust  until  he  knows  the  signs 
ot  the  storm,  the  secrets  of  navigation,  the 
rocks  ot  the  coast,  all  of  which  are  learned 
only  by  careful  sru<iy  with  chnrts  and  sound- 
ings, by  coasting  the  land  and  waichiug  the 


crested  wave.  But  can  less  be  expected  of 
that  other  pilot  who  is  to  steer  the  ship  which 
contains  us  all? 

The  failure  of  the  modern  soldier  as  states- 
man is  exhibited  by  Mr.  Buckle  in  his  remark- 
able work  on  the  ''History  of  Civilization." 
Writing  as  a  philo.sopher  devoteil  to  liberal 
ideas,  he  does  not  disguise  that  in  antiquity 
'*the  most  eminent  soldiers  were  likewise  the 
most  eminent  politicians;"  but  he  plainly 
shows  the  reason  when  he  adds  that  ''in  the 
midst  of  the  hurry  and  turmoil  of  camps  these 
eminent  men  cultivated  their  minds  to  the 
highest  point  that  the  knowledge  of  that  age 
would  allow."  (Vol.  I,  chap.  4.)  The  secret 
was  culture  not  confined  to  war.  In  modern 
Europe  few  soldiers  have  been  more  con- 
spicuous than  Gustavus  Adolphus  and  Fred- 
erick sometimes  called  the  Great:  but  we 
learn  from  our  author  that  both  ''failed  igno- 
miniously  in  their  domesi ic  policy  and  showed 
themselves  as  short-sighted  in  the  arts  of 
peace  as  th»-y  were  sagacious  in  the  arts  of 
war."  {Ibid.)  '1  he  judgment  of  Marlborough 
is  more  pointed.  While  portraying  him  as 
"the  greatest  conqueror  of  the  age.  the  hero 
of  a  hundred  fights,  the  victor  of  Blenheim 
and  Ramillies,"  the  same  philosophical  writer 
adds  that  he  was  "  a  man  not  only  of  the  most 
idle  and  I'rivolous  pursuits,  but  so  miserably 
ignorarit  that  his  deficiencies  made  him  the 
ridicule  of  his  contemporaries,"  while  his 
politics  were  compounded  of  selfishne^  and 
treachery.  Nor  was  Wellington  an  exception. 
Though  shining  in  the  field  without  a  rival, 
and  remarkable  for  integrity  of  purpose,  an 
unflinching  honesty  and  high  moral  feeling,  the 
conqueror  of  Waterloo  is  described  as '*  never- 
thel^-ss  utterly  unequal  to  llie  complicated 
exigencies  of  political  life."  (Ibid  )  This 
jadgment  of  the  philosopher  is  confirmed  by 
that  of  Metternich,  the  renowned  statesman, 
who,  after  encountering  Wellington  at  the 
congresses  of  Vienna  and  Verona,  did  not 
he.'-itate  to  write  of  him  as  ''  the  Great  Baby." 
(Sir  H.  L.  Bulwer,  Historical  Characters, 
Vol.  II,  p.  320.  Such  are  the  examples  of 
history,  each  with  its  warning. 

It  would  be  hard  to  find  anything  in  the 
native  endowments  or  in  the  training  of  our 
chieftain  to  makfhiman  illustrious e-xception  ; 
at  least  nothing  of  the  kind  is  recorded.  Was 
nature  more  generous  with  bun  than  with 
Marlborough  or  Wellington,  Gustavus  Adol- 
phus or  Frederick  called  the  Great?  Or  was 
his  experience  of  life  a  better  preparation  than 
theirs  ?  And  yet  they  failed  except  in  war.  It 
is  not  known  that  our  chieftain  had  any  expe- 
rience as  a  civilian  until  he  i)ecame  President, 
nor  does  any  partisan  attribute  to  him  that 
double  culture  which  in  antiquity  made  the 
same  man  soldier  and  statesman.  It  has  been 
often  said  that  he  took  no  note  of  public  affairs 
never  voting  but  once  in  his  life^  and  then  for 


9 


James  Buchanan.  After  leaving  West  Point  he 
becanae  a  caf)rain  in  the  Army,  but  soon  aban- 
doned the  service  to  reapftear  at  a  later  day  as  a 
snccessf  ui  general.  Tiiere  is  no  reason  to  believe 
that  heemployed  this  imerraediate  period  inany 
way  calculated  to  improve  hiin  as  a  statesman. 
One  of  his  unhesirating  supporters,  my  col- 
league, [Mr.  Wilson.]  in  a  s[)eech  intended 
to  commend  him  for  reelection  says: 

"  Before  the  war  we  knew  nothing  of  Grant.  lie 
was  earning  a  few  hundred  dollars  a  year  in  tunning 
hides  in  Galena." 

By  the  war  he  passed  to  be  President;  and 
such  was  his  preparation  to  govern  the  great 
liepublic,  making  it  an  example  to  mankind. 
Thus  he  learnnd  to  deal  wi.h  all  qnesiions 
domestic  and  foreign,  whether  of  peace  or  war, 
to  declare  constitutional  law  and  international 
law  and  to  adfninisier  the  vast  ar^'ointing 
power,  creating  C-ibinet  officers,  judges,  for- 
eign ministers,  and  an  uncounted  army  of 
officeholders. 

To  ihese  things  must  be  added  that  when  ^ 
this  so  dier  first  began  as  civilian  he  was  j 
already  forty  six  years  old.    At  this  mature  } 
age,  close  upon  ha'f  a  century,  when  habits  j 
are  irrevocably  fixed,  when  the  mind  lias  haid  a 
ened  against  what  is  new,  when  the  character  | 
has  taken  its  permanent  form,  and  the  whole  | 
man  is  rooted  in  liis  own  unchangeable  indi-  | 
viduality,  our  soldier  entered  abrup;  ly  upon  the 
untried  life  of  a  civilian  in  its  most  exalted 
sphere.    Do  not  be  surprised,  tbar,  like  other 
soldiers,  he  failed  ;  the  wonder  would  be  had  | 
he  succeeded.  Harvey  was  accustomed  to  say  ;! 
that  nobody  over  forty  ever  accepted  his  dis-  ! 
covery  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood  ;  but  he  j 
is  not  the  only  person  who  has  recognized  this  \ 
period  of  life  as  the  dividing  point  after  which  i 
it  is  difficult  to  learn  new  things.    Something  ll 
like  this  is  embodied  in  the  French  saying,  } 
that  at  forty  a  man  has  given  his  measure.  At 
least  his  Vocation  is  settled — how  completely 
is  seen  if  we  suppose  the  statesman  after  trav-  j 
ersuig  the  dividing  point  abruptly  changed  to  j| 
the  soldier.    And  yet  at  an  age  nearly  seven  li 
years  later  our  soldier  precipitately  changed  i 
to  the  statesman. 

This  sudden  metamorphosis  cannot  be  forgot- 
ten when  we  seek  to  comprehend  the  strange 
pretensions  which  ensued.  It  is  easy  to  see 
how  some  very  moderate  experience  in  civil 
life,  involving  of  course  the  lesson  of  subor- 
dination to  republican  principles,  would  have 
prevented  indeiensible  acts. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THE  LATE  EDWIN"  M.  STAXTOX. 

Something  also  must  be  attributed  to  indi- 
vidual character;  an<i  here  1  express  no  opin- 
ion of  my  own;  1  shall  allow  anoiuer  to  speak 
in  solemn  words  echoed  from  the  tomb. 

On  reaching  Washington  at  the  opening  of 
Cougiess  in  December,  1809,  I  was  pained  to  ! 
hear  that  Mr.  Stanion,  lately  Secretary  of  | 


War,  was  in  failing  health.  Full  of  gratitude 
for  his  unsurpassed  services,  and  with  a  senti- 
mpiit  of  friendship  quickened  by  common 
P'llitical  sympathies,  I  lost  no  time  in  seeing 
\  him,  and  repeated  my  visits  until  his  death, 
:  toward  the  close  of  the  same  month.  My  last 
;  visit  was  marked  by  a  communication  never 
i  to  be  forgotten.  As  I  entered  his  bedroom, 
I  'ffhere  I  found  him  reclining  on  a  sofa,  propped 
I  by  pillows,  he  reached  out  bis  hand,  already 
Clammy  cold,  and  in  reply  to  my  inquiry, 
Llow  are  you?''  answered,  Waiting  for 
mv  furlough.*'  Then  at  once  with  singular 
solemnity  he  said,  "I  have  something  to  say 
to  you."  When  I  was  seated  he  proceeded 
without  one  word  of  introduction  :  ''1  know 
General  Grant  better  than  any  other  person 
in  the  country  can  know  him.  It  was  my  duty 
to  study  him.  and  I  did  so  night  aid  d  ly.  when 
I  saw  him  and  when  I  did  not  see  him.  and 
now  I  tell  you  what  I  kno'-v,  he  cannot  govern 
this  country .' '  The  intensity  of  his  manner  and 
ihe  posiiiveness  of  his  judgment  surprised  me, 
for  though  I  was  aware  thar  the  late  St-cretary 
of  War  did  not  place  the  President  very  high 
in  general  capacity,  I  was  not  prepared  for 
a  judgment  so  strongly  couched.  At  last, 
afier  some  delay,  occupied  in  meditating  his 
remarkable  words.  I  observed,  '*  What  you 
say  is  very  broad."'  ''It  is  as  true  as  it  is 
broad,"  he  replied  promptly.  I  added,  ''You 
are  tardy  ;  you  tell  this  late  ;  why  did  you  not 
say  it  before  his  nomination?''  He  answered 
tliat  he  was  not  consulted  about  the  nomination, 
and  had  no  opporiuniry  of  expre.-^sing  his 
opinion  upon  ir.  besides  being  mucli  occupied 
at  ttie  time  by  his  duties  as  Secretary  of  War 
and  his  contest  with  the  President.  I  followed 
by  saying,  '"But  you  took  part  in  ihe  pres- 
idential elec'ion,  and  made  a  succession  of 
speeches  for  him  in  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania." 
*'  I  spoke,"  said  he,  but  I  never  introduced 
the  name  of  General  Gravt.  1  spoke  for  the 
Ilepubiican  party  and  the  Republican  cause." 
ibis  was  the  last  time  I  saw  Mr.  Slant  on.  A 
few  days  later  1  followed  him  to  the  grave 
where  he  now  rests.  As  the  vagaries  of  the 
President  became  more  manifest  and  the  pres- 
idential office  seemed  more  and  more  a  play- 
thing and  perquisite,  this  dying  judgment  of 
the  great  citizen  who  knew  him  so  well 
haunted  me  constantly  day  and  night,  and  I 
now  communicate  it  to  ray  country,  feeling 
that  it  is  a  legacy  which  1  have  no  right  to 
withhold.  Beyond  the  intrinsic  interest  from 
irs  author,  it  is  not  without  value  as  tes- 
timony iu  considering  how  the  President  could 
have  been  led  into  that  Quixotism  of  personal 
pretension  which  it  is  my  duty  to  expose. 

DUTY  TO  MAKE  EXPOSURE. 

Pardon  me  if  I  repeat  that  it  is  my  duty  to 
make  this  exfiosure,  spreading  before  you  the 
proofs  of  that  personal  goveruiueut,  which  will 


10 


only  pass  without  censure  when  it  passes  with- 
out observation.  Insisting  upon  reelection, 
the  President  challenges  inquiry  and  puts  him- 
Belf  upon  the  country,  Bui  even  if  his  press- 
ure for  reelection  did  not  menace  ihe  tran- 
quillity of  the  country,  it  is  important  that  the 
personal  pretensiotis  he  has  set  up  should  be 
exposed,  that  no  President  hereafter  may  ven 
lure  upon  such  ways  and  no  Senator  presume 
to  deleud  them.    The  case  is  clear  as  noon. 

TWO  TYPICAL  INSTANCES. 

In  opening  this  catah->gue  I  select  two 
typical  iustauces,  Nepotism  and  Gitt-takiug 
officially  compensated,  eacli  absolutely  inde- 
fensible in  the  head  of  a  Republic,  most  per- 
nicious in  example,  and  showing  beyond  ques- 
tion that  surpassing  egotism  which  changed 
the  presidential  office  into  a  personal  insiru- 
mentaiiiy,  not  unlike  the  trunk  of  an  elephant, 
apt  for  all  things,  small  as  well  as  great,  from 
provision  for  a  relation  to  forcing  a  treaty  on 
a  reluctant  Senate  or  forcing  a  reelection  on 
a  reluctant  people. 

NEPOTISM  OF  THE  PRESIDENT. 

Between  these  two  typical  instances  I  hesi- 
tate which  to  place  fjremost,  but  since  the 
nepotism  of  the  l^resident  is  a  ruling  passion 
revealing  the  primary  instincts  of  his  nature  ; 
since  it  is  maintanied  by  him  in  utter  uncon- 
sciousness of  its  oflfensive  character ;  since 
instead  of  blushing  for  it  as  an  unhappy  mis- 
take he  continues  to  uphold  it ;  since  it  has 
been  openly  defended  by  Senators  on  this 
floor,  and  since  no  true  patriot  anxious  for 
republican  institutions  can  doubt  that  it  ought 
to  be  driven  with  hissing  and  scorn  from  all 
possibility  of  repetition,  I  begin  with  this 
undoubted  abuse. 

There  has  been  no  call  of  Congress  for  a 
return  of  the  relations  holding  office,  stipend 
or  money-making  opportunity  under  the  Pres- 
ident. The  country  is  left  to  the  press  for  in- 
formation on  this  important  subject.  If  there 
is  any  exaggeration  the  President  is  in  fault, 
since  knowing  the  discreditable  allegations  he 
has  not  hastened  to  furnish  the  precise  facts, 
or  at  least  his  partisans  have  failed  in  not  call- 
ing for  the  official  information.  In  the  mood 
which  they  have  showti  in  tins  Chamber  it  is 
evident  that  any  resolution  calling  for  it  moved 
by  a  Senator  not  known  to  be  tor  his  reelec- 
tion would  meet  wi(h  opposiiion,  and  an  effort 
to  vindicate  republican  institutions  would  be 
denounced  as  an  assault  on  the  President.  But 
the  newspapers  have  placed  enough  beyond 
question  tor  judgment  on  this  extraordinary 
case,  althougti  thus  far  there  has  been  no 
attempt  to  appreciate  it,  especially  in  th3  light 
of  history. 

One  list  makes  the  number  of  beneficia- 
ries as  many  as  forty-two — being  probably 
every  known  person  allied  to  the  President  by 
blood  or  marriage.    Persons  seeming  to  speak 


for  the  President,  or  at  least  after  careful  ia« 
quirie?:,  have  denied  the  accuracy  of  this  list, 
reducing  it  to  thirteen.  It  will  not  be  ques- 
tioned that  there  is  at  least  a  baker's  dozen  ia 
this  category — thirteen  relations  of  the  Presi- 
dent billeted  on  the  country,  not  one  of  whona 
but  for  this  relationship  would  have  been 
brought  forward,  the  whole  con'siituting a  case 
of  nepotism  not  utiworthy  of  those  worst  gov- 
erntnents  where  office  is  a  family  possession. 

Beyond  the  list  of  thirteen  are  other  revela- 
tions, showing  that  this  strange  abuse  did 
not  stop  with  the  President's  relations,  but 
that  these  obtained  appointtnents  for  others  ia 
their  circle,  so  that  every  relai  ion  became  a  cen- 
ter of  influence,  while  the  presidential  family 
extended  indefinitely. 

Only  one  President  has  appointed  relations, 
and  that  was  John  Adams;  but  he  found  pub- 
lic opinion,  inspired  by  the  example  of 
Washington,  so  strong  Jigainst  it  that  after  a 
slight  experiment  he  replied  to  an  applicant, 

You  know  it  is  impossible  for  me  to  appoint 
my  own  relations  to  anything  without  drawing 
forth  a  torrent  of  obloquy."  (Letter  to  Ben- 
jamin Adams,  April  2,  1799;  John  Adams's 
Works,  vol.  VIII,  p.  G34.)  The  judgment  of 
the  country  found  voice  in  Thomas  Jefferson, 
who.  in  a  leiter  written  shortly  after  he  became 
President,  used  tliese  strong  words:  "Mr. 
Adams  degraded  Jdmself  infinitely  by  his  con- 
duct on  this  subject."  But  John  Adams, 
besides  transferring  his  son,  John  Quincy 
Adams,  from  one  diplomatic  post  to  another, 
appointed  only  two  relations.  Pray,  sir,  what 
words  would  Jefferson  use  if  he  were  here  to 
speak  on  the  open  and  multifarious  nepotism 
of  our  President? 

ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY  OF  NEPOTISM. 

The  presidential  pretension  is  so  important 
in  every  aspect,  and  the  character  of  repub- 
lican institutions  is  so  absolutely  compromised 
by  its  toleration,  that  it  cannot  be  treated  in 
any  perfunctory  way.  It  shall  not  be  my  fault 
if  hereafter  there  is  any  doubt  with  regard 
to  it. 

The  word  "nepotism"  is  of  Italian  origin. 
First  appearing  at  Rome  when  the  papal  power 
was  at  its  height,  it  served  to  designate  the 
authority  and  influence  exercised  by  the 
nephews,  or  more  generally  the  family  of  a 
Pope.  All  the  family  of  a  Pope  were  nephews 
and  the  Pope  was  universal  uncle.  As  far 
back  as  10(37  this  undoubted  abuse  occupied 
attention  to  such  a  degree  that  it  became  the 
subject  of  an  able  historical  work  in  two  vol- 
umes, entitled  //  Xipotismo  di  Roma,  which 
is  full  of  instruction  and  warning  even  for 
our  Uepublic.  From  Italian  the  word  j)assed 
into  other  Europdti  hmguages,  but  in  the 
lapse  ot  lime  or  process  of  naturalization,  it 
has  come  to  denote  the  misconduct  of  the 
appointing  power.      Addison,   who  visited 


11 


Rome  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  century. 
descril)e'i  it  as  ''undue  patronajie  bestowed 
by  the  Popps  upon  the  rnembers  of  their  fam- 
ily." Bur.  the  word  has  ampiitied  since,  so  as 
to  embrace  others  besides  Ptjjies  who  appoint 
relations  to  office.  Johnson  in  his  D  ciiotiarv 
dt-fiued  it  simply  as  "fondness  for  nephews;"' 
but  our  latesi  and  best  iexicogrnpher,  Wor- 
cester, supplies  a  definition  more  complete 
and  satisfactory:  ''  Favoritism  shown  to  rela- 
tions; patronaue  bestowed  in  consideration 
of  family  relationship  and  vot  of  merit."' 
Such  undoubtedly  is  the  meaning  of  the  word 
as  now  received  and  emfjloy^'d. 

The  character  of  this  pretension  appears  in 
its  oriiriri  and  history.  In  the  early  days  of 
the  ('hurch.  Po|)es  are  described  as  discarding 
all  reLtionship,  whether  of  blood  or  alliance, 
and  inclining  to  merit  alone  in  their  appoint 
meijts.  alihougli  there  were  some  with  so  large 
a  number  of  nepliews.  jjratid  neidiews. brothers- 
in-law,  and  relations  as  to  baffle  belief,  and  yet  it 
is  reconied  that  no  sooner  did  the  good  Pope 
enter  the  Va'icat),  whicli  is  the  Execmive  Man- 
sion of  Ptome,  than  lelations  fled,  brothers-in- 
law  hid  themselves,  grand-nephews  removed 
away,  and  net)hews  got  at  a  long  distance. 
Such  was  the  early  virtue.  Nepotism  did  not 
exist,  and  the  woid  itself  was  unknown. 

At  last,  in  1471,  twenty-one  years  before 
the  discovery  of  America  by  Christopher 
Columi)us,  Sixtus  IV  became  Pope,  and  with 
hiiu  began  that  nepotism  which  soon  became 
famousasa  Koman  institution.  Born  in  1411, 
the  son  of  a  fisherman,  tlie  eminent,  founder  was 
already  titty-seven  years  old,  and  he  reigned 
thirteen  years,  bringing  lo  his  functions  large 
expt-rieiice  as  a  successful  preacher  and  as 
general  of  the  Franciscan  friars.  Though 
cra'iledin  poverty,  and  by  ihe  vows  of  his  order 
b(miid  to  mendicancy,  he  began  at  once  to  heap 
otlice  and  nches  upon  the  various  members  of 
his  fa;uily,  so  that  his  conduct,  frotn  its  bare 
faced  inconsistency  with  the  obiigation  of  his 
liie,  excited,  accoidmgto  the  litsiorian,  *'  the 
amrizement  and  wonder  of  all."  The  uselul 
reforms  he  attempted  are  forgotten,  and  this 
reuiarliable  pontitf  is  chiefly  remembert-d  now 
as  the  earliest  nepotist.  D.ffereiii  degrees  of 
severity  are  employed  by  di&Vrent  autliors  in 
charncierizing  this  unhappy  fame.  Bouillet, 
in  his  Dictionary  of  History,  having  Catholic 
approb'^tton.  describes  him  as  feeble  toward 
his  nephews,"  and  our  own  Cyclopaedia,  in  a 
brief  exposition  of  iiis  character,  says  lie 
made  hitnself  odious  by  excessive  nepotism." 
But  in  all  varieties  of  expression  the  ofleuse 
Btands  out  for  judgment. 

The  immediate  success'^r  of  Sixtus  was 
Innocent  VI ll,  whom  the  historian  describes 
as  "very  cold  to  his  relations,"  since  two 
only  obtained  pre'erment  at  liis  hands.  But 
the  example  of  the  founder  so  far  prevailed 
that  for  a  century  nepotism,   as  was  said. 


"  lorded  it  in  Rome,"  except  in  a  few  instances 
wonhy  of  commemoration  and  example. 

Of  these  exceptions,  the  Hrst  in  time  was 
Julius  If,  founder  of  St.  Peter's  at  Rome, 
whose  remarkable  countenance  is  so  beau- 
tifully preserved  by  the  genius  of  Raffaelle. 
Though  the  nephew  of  the  nepotist,  and  not 
declining  to  a[)point  all  relations,  he  did  it 
with  such  moderation  that  nepotism  was  said 
to  be  dying  out.  Adrian  VI,  early  teacher 
of  Charles  V,  and  successor  of  Leo  X.  set  a 
better  example  by  refusing  absolutely.  But  so 
accustomed  had  Rome  become  to  this  abuse, 
that  not  only  the  embassadors  but  the  people 
condemned  him  as  "too  severe  wiih  his  rela- 
tions." A  S(m  of  his  cousin,  studying  in 
Siena,  started  fir  Rome,  trustinj;  to  obtain 
important  recognition.  But  the  Pope,  with- 
out sef-ing  him,  sent  him  back  on  a  hired  horse. 
Relations  thronged  from  other  places  and  even 
from  across  the  Alps,  longing  for  that  great- 
ness which  other  Popes  had  lavished  on  family  ; 
but  Adrian  dismissed  t  hem  with  a  si ij^ lit  change 
of  clothing  and  an  allowance  of  money  for 
the  journey.  One  who  from  poverty  came  on 
foot  was  permitted  to  return  on  foot.  This 
Pof>e  carried  abnegation  of  his  family  so  far 
as  to  mj.ke  relationship  an  excuse  for  not  re- 
warding one  who  had  served  the  Church  well. 

Similar  in  characer  was  Marcellus  II,  who 
became  Pope  in  looo.  He  was  unwilling 
that  any  of  his  family  should  come  to  Rome; 
even  his  broiher  w^s  forbidden  ;  but  this  good 
example  was  closed  by  deaih  after  a  reign  of 
twenty  days  only.  And  yet  this  brief  period 
of  exemplary  virtue  has  made  this  pontiff 
famous.  Kindred  in  spirit  whs  Uiban  VI t, 
who  reigned  thirteen  days  only  in  1590,  but 
long  enough  to  rep^-l  his  relations,  and  also 
Leo  XI,  who  reigned  iwenty-flve  days  in  IGUo. 
To  this  list  may  be  added  Innocent  IX,  who 
died  after  two  months  of  service.  It  is  related 
that  his  death  displeased  his  relations  much, 
and  dissolved  the  air-castles  they  had  built. 
They  had  hurried  from  Bo ogna,  but  except  a 
grand  nephew,  all  were  obliged  to  return  poor 
as  ihev  came.  In  this  list  I  must  not  forget 
Pius  V,  who  re'gned  from  lobo  to  1572.  He 
set  h.iinself  so  completely  against  aggrandizing 
his  own  family,  that  he  was  with  ditii  -uby  per- 
suaded to  make  a  sister's  son  cardinal,  and 
would  not  have  done  it  hid  not  ail  the  car- 
dmals  united  on  grounds  of  conscience  against 
ihe  denial  of  this  dignity  to  one  most  worthy 
of  it.  Such  virtue  was  part  ot  that  elevated 
character  which  caused  his  subsequent  canon- 
ization. 

These  good  Popes  were  short-lived.  The 
reigns  of  all  except  Pius  counted  by  days 
only;'  but  they  opened  happy  glimpses  of  an 
administration  where  the  powers  of  govern- 
ment were  not  treated  as  a  personal  peiquisiie. 
The  opposite  list  had  the  advantage  of  time. 

Conspicuous    among  nepotists  was  Alex- 


12 


ander  VI,  whose  family  name  of  Borgia  is 
damned  to  fame.  With  hira  iiepotism  as- 
sumed its  most  brutal  and  barbarous  develop- 
ment, reflecting  (he  character  of  its  pontifical 
author,  wlio  was  witliout  the  smallest  ray  of 
good.  Other  Popes  were  less  cruel  and  bloody, 
but  i!Ot  less  determined  in  providing  for  their 
families.  Paul  liJ,  who  was  of  the  great 
house  of  Farnese,  would  have  had  the  Estates 
of  the  Church  a  garden  for  the  "  liliws"  which 
flourish  on  the  escutcheon  of  his  family.  It 
is  related  that  when  Urban  VUI,  who  was  a 
Barberini,  commenced  his  historic  reign,  all 
his  relations  at  a  distance  flew  to  Home  like 
the  "bees"  on  the  f.imily  arms,  to  suck  the 
honey  of  the  Church,  but  not  leaving  behind 
the  sting  with  which  they  pricked  while  they 
sucked.  Whether  lilies  or  bees  it  was  the  5ame. 
The  latter  pontiff  gave  to  nepotism  fullness 
of  power  when  he  resolved  "to  have  no 
business  with  any  one  not  dependent  upon 
his  house."  In  the  same  spirit  he  excused 
himself  from  making  a  man  cardinal  because 
he  had  been  "  the  enemy  of  his  nephews." 
Although  nothing  so  positive  is  recorded  of 
Paul  V,  who  was  a  Borghese,  his  nepotism 
appears  in  the  Roman  saying,  that  while  serv- 
ing the  Church  as  a  good  shepherd  he  "gave 
too  much  wool  to  his  relations."  These 
instructive  incidents,  illusiraiing  the  pon- 
tifical pretension,  reflect  light  on  the  history 
of  palaces  and  galleries  at  Rome,  now  admired 
by  the  visitor  from  distant  lands.  If  not  cre- 
ated, they  were  at  least  enlarged  by  nepotism. 

It  does  not  always  appear  how  many  rela- 
tions a  Pope  endowed.  Otten  it  was  all,  as  in 
the  case  of  Gregory  XIII,  who,  besides 
advancing  a  nephew  actually  at  Rome,  calleci 
thither  all  his  nephews  and  grand-nephews, 
whether  from  brothers  or  sisters,  and  gave 
them  offices,  dignities,  governments,  lord 
ships,  and  abbacies.  Cassar  Borgia  and  his 
sister  Lucrezia  were  not  the  only  rela- 
tions of  Alexander  VI.  I  do  not  find  the 
number  adopted  by  Sixtus,  the  founder  of  the 
system.  Pius  iV,  wlio  was  of  the  grasping 
Medicean  family,  favored  no  less  than  twenty- 
five.  Alexander  VII,  of  the  Chigi  family, 
had  about  him  five  nephews  and  one  brother, 
■which  a  contemporary  characterized  as  "  ne- 
potism all  complete."  This  pontiff  began  his 
leign  by  forbidding  his  relations  to  appear  at 
Rome,  which  redounded  at  once  to  his  credit 
throughout  the  Christian  world,  while  the 
astonished  people  discoursed  of  his  holiness 
and  the  purity  of  his  life,  expecting  even  to 
see  miracies.  In  making  the  change  he 
yielded  evidently  to  immoral  pressure  and 
the  example  of  predecessors. 

The  performances  of  papal  nephews  figure 
in  history.  Next  after  the  Borgias,  were  the 
Caraffas,  who  obtained  power  through  Paul 
IV,  but  at  last  becoming  too  insolent  and 
rapacious,  their  uucle  was  compelled  to  strip 


them  of  their  dignities  and  drive  them  from 
Rome.  Somet  nes  nephews  were  employed 
chiefly  in  ministering  to  pontifical  pleasures, 
as  iti  the  case  of  Julias  III,  who,  according 
to  the  historian,  "thought  of  tiothing  but  ban- 
queting with  that  one  and  with  this  one,  keep- 
ing his  relations  in  Rome,  rather  to  accom- 
pany him  at  banquets  than  to  aid  him  in  the 
government  of  the  holy  Church,  of  which  he 
thought  little."  This  occasion  for  relations 
does  not  exist  at  Rome  now,  as  the  pontiff  leads 
a  discreet  li'e,  always  at  home  and  never  ban- 
quets abroad. 

These  historic  instances  make  us  see  nepo- 
tism in  its  original  seat.  Would  you  know 
how  it  was  regarded  there?  Sometimes  it  was 
called  ahydra  wiih  many  heads,  sprouting  anew 
at  the  election  of  a  pontiff;  then  again  it  was 
called  Ottoman  rather  than  Christian  in  char- 
acter. The  contemporary  historian  who  has 
described  it  so  minutely  says  that  those  who 
merely  read  of  it  without  seeing  it  will  find  it 
difficult  to  believe  or  even  imagine.  The 
qualities  of  a  Pope's  relation  were  said  to  be 
"ignorance  and  cunning."  It  is  easy  to  be- 
lieve that  this  prostitution  of  the  head  of  the 
Church  was  one  of  the  abuses  which  excited 
the  cry  for  Reform,  and  awakened  even  ia 
Rome  the  echoes  of  Martin  Luther.  A  brave 
Swiss  is  recorded  as  declaring  himself  unwill- 
ing to  be  the  subject  of  a  pontiff  who  was 
himself  the  subject  of  his  own  relations.  But 
even  this  pretension  was  not  without  open 
defenders,  while  the  general  effrontery  with 
which  it  was  maintained  assumed  that  it  was 
above  question.  If  some  gave  with  eyes  closed, 
most  gave  with  eyes  open.  It  was  said  that 
Popes  were  not  to  neglect  their  own  blood, 
that  they  should  not  show  themselves  worse 
than  the  beasts,  not  one  of  whom  failed  to 
caress  his  relations,  and  the  case  of  bears  and 
lions,  the  most  ferocious  of  all,  was  cited  as 
authority  for  this  recognition  of  one's  own 
blood.  All  this  was  soberly  said,  and  it  is 
doubtless  true.  Not  even  a  Pope  can  justly 
neglect  his  own  blood;  but  help  and  charity- 
must  be  at  his  own  expense  and  not  at  the 
expense  of  his  country.  In  appointments  to 
office  merit  and  not  blood  is  the  only  just 
recommendation. 

That  nepotism  has  ceased  to  lord  itself  ia 
Rome;  that  no  pontiff  billets  his  relations 
upon  the  Church;  tliat  the  appointing  power 
of  the  Pope  is  treated  as  a  public  trust  and 
not  as  a  personal  perquisite — all  this  is  the 
present  testimony  with  regard  to  that  govern- 
ment which  knows  from  experience  the  bane- 
ful character  of  this  abuse. 

AilEUlCAN  AUTHORITIES  OX  NEPOTISM. 

The  nepotism  of  Rome  was  little  known  in 
our  country,  and  I  do  not  doubt  that  Wash- 
ington, when  declining  to  make  the  presiden- 
tial office  a  persoual  perquisite,  was  governed 


13 


by  that  instinct  of  duty  and  patriotism  which 
rendered  hini  so  preeminent.  Through  all  the 
perils  of  a  seven  years'  war,  he  had  battled 
with  that  kingly  rule  which  elevates  a  whole 
family  without  regard  to  merit,  fastening  all 
upon  the  nation,  and  he  had  learned  that  this 
royal  system  could  find  no  place  in  a  republic. 
Therefore  he  rejected  the  claims  of  relations, 
and  in  nothing  was  his  example  more  beauti- 
ful. His  latest  biographer,  Washington  Irving, 
records  him  as  saying: 

"  So  far  as  I  know  ray  own  mind,  I  would  notbein 
the  remotest  decree  influenced  in  making  nomina- 
tions bv  motives  arising  from  the  ties  of  family  or 
blood."— Xi/e  of  Waahington,  Vol.  V,  p.  22. 

Then  again  he  declared  his  purpose, 

"  To  discharge  the  duties  of  oflBce  with  that  im- 
partiality and  zeal  for  the  public  good  which  ought 
never  to  suffer  connections  of  blood  or  friendship  to 
mingle  so  as  to  have  the  least  sway  on  decisions  of 
a  public  nature." 

This  excellent  rule  of  conduct  is  illustrated 
by  the  advice  to  his  successor  with  regard 
to  the  transfer  of  his  son,  John  Quincy 
Adams.  After  giving  it  as  his  decided  opin- 
ion that  the  latter  was  the  most  valuable  char- 
acter we  had  abroad,  and  promising  to  be  the 
ablest  of  all  our  diplomatic  corps,  Washing- 
ton declares : 

"If  he  waa  now  to  be  brought  into  that  line,  or 
into  any  other  public  walk,  I  could  not.  upon  the 
principle  which  has  regulated  my  own  conduct, 
disapprove  of  the  caution  which  is  hinted  at  in  the 
Utter."— John  Adam>f'8  Works,  Vol.  VIII.  p.  530. 

Considering  the  im[)Ortance  of  the  rule  it 
were  better  for  the  country  if  it  had  prevailed 
over  parental  regard  and  the  extraordinary 
merits  of  the  son. 

In  vindicating  his  conduct  at  a  later  day 
John  Adams  protested  against  what  he  called 
"the  hypersuperlaiive  virtue"  of  Washing- 
ton, and  insisted: 

"A  President  ought  not  to  appoint  a  man  be- 
c.Tuse  he  is  his  relation  ;  nor  ought  he  to  refuse  or 
neglect  to  appoint  him  for  that  reason." 

"With  absolute  certainty  that  the  President 
is  above  all  prejudice  of  family  and  sensitive 
to  merit  only,  tliis  rule  is  not  unreasonable ; 
but  who  cati  be  trusted  to  apply  it? 

JeSerson  devtloped  and  explained  the  true 
principles  in  a  manner  worthy  of  republican 
institutions.  In  a  letter  to  a  relation  immedi- 
ately after  becoming  President,  he  wrote: 

"  The  public  will  never  be  made  to  believe  that 
an  appoiutuiL'nt  of  a  relation  is  made  on  the  ground 
of  merit  alone,  uninfluenced  by  family  views,  iior 
can  they  ever  xee.  with  approbation  officer,  the  di>tposal 
ofiohich  they  intrust  to  their  Presideuta  for  public  pur- 
poxea,  divided  out  o«  fainily  property.  Mr.  Adams 
degraded  himself  infinkely  by  his  conduct  on  this 
subject,  as  Washington  had  done  himself  the  great- 
est honor.  With  two  such  examples  to  proceed  by, 
I  shriuld  be  doubly  inexcusable  to  ere."— Letter  to 
(jeorg<;  Jefferxon^  Marvh  27, 18Ul;  Jefferson's  Works, 
Vol.  IV,  p.  388. 

After  his  retirement  from  the  Presidency,  in 
a  letter  to  a  kinsman,  he  asserts  the  rule  again  : 
*'  Toward  acquiring  the  confidenee  of  the  people. 


the  very  first  measure  is  to  satisfy  thcra  of  bis  dis- 
interestedness, and  that  he  is  directing  their 
aS"iirs  with  a  single  eye  to  their  good,  and  not  to 
build  up  fortunes  tor  himself  and  family,  and  esrie- 
cially  that  the  officers  appuinted  to  transact  their 
business,  are  appointed  because  they  are  the  fittest 
men,  not  because  they  are  his  relations.  So  prone 
are  they  to  susF>icion,  thai  where  a  Prerider.t  ap- 
points a  relation  of  his  own.  however  worthy,  they 
will  believe  that  favor,  and  not  merit,  was  the 
motive.  I  therefore  laid  it  down  as  a  law  of  con- 
duct for  myself.  nev<>rtogive  an  appointment  to  a 
relation."— /^e^/f^r  to  J.  (Jarland  Jefferuon,  J dnunry  25, 
1810;  Ibid.,  Vol.  V.  p.  498. 

That  statement  is  unanswerable.  The  elect 
of  the  people  must  live  so  as  best  to  maintain 
their  interests  and  to  elevate  the  national  sen 
timent.  This  can  be  only  by  an  example  of 
unselfish  devotion  to  the  public  weal  which 
shall  be  above  suspicion.  A  President  sus- 
pected of  weakness  for  his  relations  is  already 
shorn  of  strength. 

In  saying  that  his  predecessor  "degraded 
himself  infinitely  by  his  conduct  on  this  sub- 
ject," Jefferson  shows  the  rigor  of  his  require- 
ment. Besides  the  transfer  of  his  son,  John 
Quincy  Adams,  from  one  diplomatic  mission 
to  another,  John  Adams  is  responsible  for  the 
appointment  of  his  son-in  law,  Colonel  Smith, 
as  surveyor  of  the  port  of  New  York,  and  his 
wife's  nephew,  William  Cranch.  as  chief  justice 
of  thecircuitcourtof  the  Disti ictof  Columbia— 
both  persons  of  merit,  and  the  former  serving 
through  the  war  wit  h  high  applause  of  his  supe- 
riors." The  public  sentiment  appears  in  the 
condemnation  of"  these  appointments.  In  re- 
fusing another  of  his  relations,  we  have  already 
seen  that  John  Adams  wrote:  ''You  know  it 
is  impossible  for  me  to  appoint  my  own  rela- 
tions to  anything  without  drawing  forth  a  tor- 
rent of  obloquy."  Bat  this  torrent  was 
nothing  but  the  judgment  of  the  American 
people  unwilling  that  republican  institutions 
at  that  early  day  should  suffer. 

Thus  far  Jolin  Adams  stands  alone.  If  any 
other  Piesldent  has  made  appointments  from 
his  own  family,  it  has  been  on  so  petty  a  scale 
as  not  to  be  recognized  in  history.  John 
Quiticy  Adams,  when  President,  did  not  follow 
his  father.  An  early  letter  to  his  mother  fore- 
shadows a  rule  not  unlike  that  of  Jefferson: 

"  I  hope,  my  ever  dear  and  honored  mother,  that 
you  are  fully  convinced  from  my  letters,  which  yi>u 
have  before  this  received,  that  upon  the  contingency 
of  my  father's  being  placed  in  the  first  magistracy, 
I  shall  never  give  him  any  trouble  by  solicitation 
for  office  of  any  kind.  Your  late  letters  have  re- 
peated so  many  times  that  I  shall  in  that  case  have 
nothing  to  expect,  that  I  am  afraid  you  have  im- 
agined it  possible  that  / mioht  form  exi>ectat  ions  from 
such  an  event.  I  had  hoped  that  my  mother  knew 
me  better:  that  she  did  me  the  justice  to  believe 
that  I  have  not  been  so  totally  regardless  or  forget- 
ful of  the  principles  which  ray  education  li.ol  in- 
stilled, nor  so  torally  destitute  of  a />er«ona^  sense  of 
delicacy  as  to  be  susceptibleof  a  wish  tendme  in  that 
dirociion."  — ./o/ut  Adams'a  Worku,  Vol.  VIII,  pp. 
529,  530,  note. 

To  Jefferson's  sense  of  public  duty  John 
Quincy  Adams  added  the  sense  of  personal 


14 


delicacy,  boih  strong,  against  such  appoint- 
ment. To  the  irresistible  judgment  against 
tliis  abuse,  a  recent  moralist,  of  hjfty  nature, 
Theodore  Parker,  imparts  new  expression 
when  he  sav><,  '*  It  is  a  dangerous  and  unjust 
practice.''  [Jlistoric  Americans,  p.  211.)  This 
is  simple  and  moniiory. 

PRESIDENTIAL  APOLOGIES  FOR  NEPOTISM. 

Without  the  avalanche  of  testimony  against 
this  presidential  pretension  it  is  only  necessary 
to  glance  at,  the  defenses  sometimes  set  up; 
for  sucli  isthe  insensibility  bred  hy  presidemial 
example,  that  even  this  intolerable  outrage 
is  not  without  voices,  speaking  for  the  Presi- 
dent. Sometimes  it  is  said  that,  his  salary 
being  far  from  royal,  the  people  will  not  scan 
closely  an  attem|)t  to  help  relntions.  which, 
being  interpreted,  means  that  the  President 
may  supplement  the  pettiness  of  his  salary  by 
the  appointing  power.  Let  John  Adams,  who 
did  not  hesitate  to  bestow  ottice  upon  a  few 
relations  of  unquestioned  merit,  judge  this 
pretension.    I  quote  his  words: 

'*  Every  public  man  should  be  honestly  paid  for 
his  services.  Uut  he  should  be  restrained  from 
every  jierquixite  not  known  to  the  laws,  and  he 
should  make  no  claims  uijon  the  grratirude  ot  the 
public,  nor  ever  conler  an  office  within  his  patron- 
age upon  a  son,  a  brother,  a  Iriend,  upon  pretense 
that  he  is  not  paid  for  his  services  by  the  profits  of 
bis  office."— A^<^er  to  John  Jebb,  August  21,  1785; 
Wurk-^,  Vol.  IX.  p.  535. 

It  is  impossible  to  deny  the  soundness  of 
this  requirement  and  its  completeness  as  an 
answer  to  one  of  the  apologies. 

Sometimes  the  defender  is  more  audacious, 
insisting  openly  upon  the  presidential  preroga- 
tive without  question,  until  we  seem  to  hear 
in  ag'^ravated  f()rm  the  obnoxious  cry,  "To 
the  victor  belong  the  spoils."  1  did  not 
suppose  that  this  old  cry  could  he  revived  in 
any  form  ;  but  since  it  is  heard  again,  I  choose 
to  expose  it,  and  here  I  use  the  language  of 
Madison,  whose  mi  d  wisdom  has  illumined  so 
much  of  constitutional  duty.  In  his  judgment 
the  pretension  was  odious,  "that  offices  and 
emoluments  were  the  spoils  of  victory .  ^Ae  per- 
sonal property  of  the  successful  candidate  tor 
the  Presidency, "  and  he  adds  in  words  not  to 
be  forgotten  at  this  moment: 

**The  principle  if  avowed  without  the  practice, 
or  practiced  without  the  avow.il,  could  not  fail  to 
degrade  any  Administration — both  together  com- 
pletely so."—Lener  to  Bilionrd  Coh,  August  29,  1834. 
Letters  and  Writings,  Vol.  IV,  p.  356. 

This  is  strong  language.  The  rule  in  its 
early  form  could  not  fail  to  degrade  any 
Admitiistration.  But  now  this  degrading  rule 
is  extended,  and  we  are  told  that  to  the 
President's  family  belong  the  spoils. 

Anoiher  apology,  vouchsafed  even  on  this 
floor,  is,  that  if  the  President  c:umot  appoint 
his  relations  they  alone  of  all  citizens  are 
excluded  from  office,  wliich,  it  is  said,  should 
not  be.  But  is  it  not  for  the  public  good  that 
tbej  should  be  excluded?    Such  was  the  wise 


judgment  of  Jefferson,  and  such  is  the  tegti- 
mony  from  another  quarter.  That  emineni  pre- 
late, Bishop  Butler,  who  lias  given  to  English 
literature  one  of  its  most  masterly  productions, 
known  as  "  Butler's  Analogy,"  after  his  ele- 
vation to  the  see  of  Durham  with  its  remark- 
able patronaire,  was  so  self  denying  with  regard 
to  his  family  that  a  nephew  said  to  him, 
"  Methinks,  my  lord,  it  is  a  misfortune  to  be 
related  to  you."  Golden  words  of  honor  for 
the  English  bishop  !  Bur  none  such  have  beea 
earned  by  the  American  President. 

Assuming  that  in  case  of  positive  merit  desig- 
nating a  citizen  for  a  particular  post  th^  Presi- 
dent might  a[ipoint  a  relation,  it  would  be  only 
where  i  he  merit  was  so  shining  that  his  absence 
would  be  noticed.  At  least  it  must  be  such 
as  to  make  the  citizen  a  candidate  wiihouc 
regard  to  family.  But  no  such  merit  is  attrib- 
uted to  the  beneficiaries  of  our  President,  some 
of  whom  have  done  liiile  but  bring  scandal 
U()On  I  he  public  service.  At  least  one  is  tainted 
with  iVaud,  and  another,  with  ihe  commission 
of  the  Uepublic  abroad,  has  been  guilty  ol  indis- 
cretions incon^istent  with  his  trust.  i.\ppointed 
oriuinally  in  open  defiance  of  republican  prin- 
ciples, they  have  been  retained  in  office  after 
their  unfitness  became  painfully  manifest.  By 
the  testimony  before  a  congressional  commit- 
tee, one  of  these,  a  brother-in-law,  was  impli- 
cated in  bribery  and  corruption.  It  is  said 
that  at  last,  after  considerable  delav,  the  Presi- 
dent has  consented  to  his  removal. 

Here  1  leave  for  the  present  this  enormous 
unrepubiican  pretension,  waiting  to  hear  if  it 
can  again  find  an  apologist.  Is  there  a  single 
Senator  who  will  not  dismiss  it  to  judgment? 

GIFT-TAKING  OFFICIALLY  COMPENSATED. 

From  one  typical  abuse  I  pass  to  another. 
From  a  dropsical  nepotism  swollen  to  ele- 
phantiasis, which  nobody  can  defend,  I  pass 
to  gift-taking,  which  with  our  Pres  dent  has 
assumed  an  unprecedented  form.  Sometimes 
public  men  even  in  our  country  have  taken 
jiifts,  but  it  is  not  known  tliat  any  President 
before  has  repaid  the  patron  with  office.  For 
a  public  man  to  take  gifts  is  repreliensil)le  ; 
for  a  President  to  select  Cabinet  c  mncilors 
and  other  officers  among  those  from  whom  he 
has  taken  gilts  is  an  anomaly  in  republican 
annals.  Observe,  sir,  that  I  sj)eak  of  it  geutly, 
unwilling  to  exhibit  the  indignation  whicn  such 
a  presidential  pretension  is  calculated  to 
arouse.  The  country  will  judge  it,  and  blot  it 
out  as  an  example. 

There  have  been  througUout  history  corrupt 
characters  in  official  staiioti,  but,  wheiher  in 
ancient  or  modern  limes,  the  testimony  is  con- 
stant against  the  taking  of  gifts,  and  nowhere 
with  more  force  than  in  our  Scriptures,  where 
it  is  said,  "  Thou  shalt  not  wresr,  judgment, 
thou  shalt  not  respect  persons,  neither  talce  a 
gift',  fur  a  gift  doth  blind  the  eyes  of  the 


15 


wise."  (Deuteronomy,  XVI,  19.)  Here  is  the 
inhibition  and  also  the  reason,  which  slight 
observation  shows  to  be  true.  Does  not  a  gift 
blind  the  eyes  of  the  wise?  The  influence  of 
gifis  is  represented  by  Plutarch  in  the  life  of 
a  Spartan  king: 

*'  For  he  thought  those  ways  of  intrapping  men  by 
gifts  and  presents,  which  other  kings  use,  dishonest 
and  inartiflcial  ;  and  it  seemed  lo  him  to  be  the 
most  noble  method  and  moft  suitable  to  a  king  to 
win  the  affections  of  those  that  came  near  him  by 
personal  intercourse  and  agreeable  conversation, 
eince  between  a  friend  and  a  mercenary  the  only 
distinction  is,  that  we  gain  the  one  by  our  char- 
acter and  conversation  and  the  other  by  our 
money."— Platarch'a  Lives;  Clouoh' a  Edition  Vol. 
IV,  p.  479. 

What  is  done  under  the  influence  of  gift  is 
mercenary  ;  but  whether  from  ruler  to  subject 
or  from  subject  to  ruler,  the  gift  is  equally  per- 
nicious. An  ancient  patriot  feared  "the  Greeks 
bearing  gifis,"  and  these  words  have  become 
a  proverb,  but  there  are  Greeks  bearin;?  gilts 
elsewhere  than  at  Troy.  A  public  man  can 
traffic  with  such  only  at  his  peril.  At  their 
appearance  the  prayer  should  be  said,  ''Lead 
us  not  into  temptation." 

The  best  examples  testify.  Thus  in  the  auto- 
biography of  Lord  Brougham,  posthumously 
published,  it  appears  that  at  a  great  meeting 
in  Glasgow  £500  were  subscribed  as  a  gift 
to  him  for  his  public  service,  to  be  put  in  such 
form  as  he  might  think  best.    He  hesitated. 
"It  required,'.'  he  records,  "  much  considera- 
tion, as  such  gifts  were  liable  to  abuse."    Not  I 
content  with  his  own  judgment,  he  assembled  ! 
his  friends  to  discuss  it,  "Lord   Holland.  | 
Lord  Erskine,  Romiliy  and  Baring,"  and  he 
wrote  Earl  Grey,  afterward  Prime  Minister, 
who  replied  :     Both  Granville  and  I  accepted 
a  piece  of  plate  from  the  Catholics  in  Glas- 
gow, of  no  great  value  indeed,  after  we  icere 
turned  out.    If  you  still  feel  scruples,  I  can  | 
only  add  that  it  is  impossible  to  err  on  the  | 
side  of  delicacy  with  respect  to  matters  of  | 
this  nature."     It  ended  iu  his  accepting  a 
small  gold  inkstand. 

In  our  country  Washington  keeps  his  lofty 
heights,  setting  himself  against  git\-taking  as 
against  nepotism.  In  1785,  while  in  private 
life,  two  years  after  he  ceased  to  be  com- 
mander-in-chief of  our  armies  and  four  years 
before  he  became  President,  he  could  not  be 
induced  to  accept  a  certain  amount  of  canal 
stock  offered  him  by  the  State  of  Virginia, 
as  appears  in  an  official  communication  ; 

"  It  gives  me  great  pleasure  to  inform  you  that  the 
Assembly,  without  a  dissenting  voice,  complimented 
you  with  fifty  shares  in  the  Potomac  Corapanv  and 
one  hundred  in  the  Jam^s  River  Company."—  Wnxh- 
ivjjfon's  Writings,  Vul.  IX,  p.  83;  Letter  ot  Benjamin 
Harrison.  January  6.  1775. 

Fully  to  appreciate  the  reply  of  Washington 
it  must  be  borne  in  mind  thar,  according  to 
Washington  Irving,  his  biographer,  ''Some  j 
degree  of  economy  was  necessary,  for  his  ! 
fiuaucial  affairs  had  suffered  during  the  war,  | 


and  the  products  of  his  estate  had  fallen  off." 
But  he  was  not  tempted.    Thus  he  wrote  : 

"  ITow  would  this  matter  be  viewed  by  the  eye  of 
the  world,  an'l  what  would  be  its  opinion  when  it 
conies  to  be  related  that  George  Washington  accepted 
82O,0u0?  Under  whatever  pretense,  and  however 
customarily  these  gifts  are  made  in  other  countries, 
if  I  accepted  this  should  I  not  henceforward  be  con- 
sidered as  a  dependent?  I  never  for  a  moment 
entertained  tbe  idea  of  accei)ting  \t."—ll>i(L,  p.  85i. 
Letter  to  Benjamin  Uarrieon,  January  22,  1785. 

How  admirably  he  touches  the  point  when 
he  asks,  ''If  1  accepted  this,  should  I  not 
henceforward  be  considered  as  a  dependent?" 
According  to  our  Scripture  the  gift  blinds  the 
eyes;  according  to  Washington  it  makes  the 
receiver  a  dependent.  In  harmony  with  this 
sentiment  was  his  subsequent  refusal  when 
President,  as  is  recorded  by  an  ingenious 
writer  : 

"  He  was  exceedingly  careful  about  committing 
himself,  xcould  receive  no  favors  of  any  kind,  and 
scrupulously  paid  for  everything.  A  large  house 
was  setapartforhimonNinthstreer.onthe  grounds 
now  covered  by  trie  Penn'^ylvania  University,  which 
he  refused  to  accept."— Colonel  Forney's  Anecdotes. 

By  such  instances  brought  to  light  recently, 
and  shining  in  contrast  with  our  times,  we  learn 
to  admire  anew  the  virtue  of  Washington. 

It  would  be  easy  to  show  how  in  all  ages 
the  refusal  of  gifts  has  been  recognized  as  the 
sign  of  virtue,  if  not  the  requireuDeut  of  duty. 
The  story  of  St.  Louis  of  France  is  beautiful 
and  suggestive.  Leaving  on  a  crusade  he 
charged  the  Queen  Regent,  who  remained  be- 
hind, ''  not  to  accept  presents  for  herself  or 
her  children."  Such  was  one  of  the  injunc- 
tions by  which  this  monarch,  when  far  away 
on  a  pious  expedition,  impressed  himself  upon 
his  country. 

^ly  own  strong  convictions  on  this  presiden- 
tial pretension  were  aroused  in  a  conversation 
which  it  was  my  privilege  to  enjoy  with  John 
Quincy  Adams,  as  he  sat  in  his  sick-chamber 
at  his  son's  house  in  Boston,  a  short  time 
before  he  fell  at  his  post  of  duty  in  the  House 
of  Representatives.  In  a  voice  trembling 
with  age  and  with  emotion,  he  said  that  no 
public  man  could  take  gifts  without  peril,  and 
he  confessed  that  his  own  judgment  had  been 
quickened  by  the  example  of  Count  Roman- 
zoff,  the  eminent  cliaticellor  of  the  Russian 
empire,  who,  after  receiving  costly  gifts  from 
foreign  sovereigns  with  whom  he  had  nego- 
tiated treaties,  felt  a  difficulty  of  conscience 
in  keeping  them,  and  at  last  handed  over  their 
value  to  a  hospital,  as  he  related  to  Mr.  Adams, 
then  minister  at  St.  Petersburg.  The  latter 
was  impressed  by  this  Russian  example.  ar)d 
through  his  long  career,  as  minister  abroad. 
Secretary  of  State,  President,  and  Representa- 
tive, always  refused  gifts,  unless  a  book  or 
some  small  article  in  its  nature  a  token  and 
not  a  reward  or  bribe. 

The  Constituiion  testifies  against  the  taking 
of  gifts  by  officers  of  ihe  United  States,  whea 


IG 


it  provides  that  no  person  holding  any  office 
of  profit  or  trust  under  ihem  shall,  without 
the  consent  of  tl.e  Congress,  accept  of  any 
present  or  emolument,  from  any  kiiig,  prince, 
or  foreign  State.  The  acceptance  of  a  pres 
ent  or  emolument  from  our  own  citizens  was 
left  without  constitutional  inhihition,  to  he 
constrained  by  the  pubiic  conscience  and  the 
just  aversion  to  any  semblance  of  bargain  and 
Sale  or  bribery  in  the  publ  c  service. 

The  case  of  our  President  is  exceptional. 
Notoriously  he  has  taken  gifts  while  in  the 
public  service,  some  at  least  after  he  had  been 
elected  Presi<lent,  until  the  Galena  tanner 
of  a  few  hundred  dollars  a  year,"  to  borrow 
the  words  of  my  colleague,  [Mr.  Wilson,] 
o-e  of  his  supporters,  is  now  rich  in  houses, 
lands,  and  stock,  above  his  salary,  beir.2  prob- 
ably the  richest  President  since  George  Wash- 
ington. Notoriously  he  has  appointed  to  his 
Cabinet  several  among  these  "  Greeks  bearing 
gifts,"  without  seeming  to  see  the  indecorum, 
if  not  the  indecency  of  the  transaction.  At 
least  two  if  not  three  of  these  Greeks,  hav- 
ing no  known  position  in  the  Republican 
party  or  influence  in  the  country,  have  been 
selected  as  his  counselors  in  national  afFtiirs, 
and  heads  of  great  departments  of  Govern- 
ment. Again  do  I  repeat  the  words  of  our 
Scriptures,  "A  gift  doth  blind  the  eyes  of  the 
wise."  Again,  the  words  of  Washington,  "If 
I  accepted  this  should  I  not  henceforward  be 
considered  a  dependent?" 

Nor  does  the  case  of  the  first  Secretary  of 
Sta'e  differ  in  character  from  the  other  three. 
The  President,  feeling  under  personal  obliga- 
tion to  Mr.  W^ashburne  for  important  support, 
gave  him  a  complimet»tary  nomination,  with 
tlie  understanding  that  after  confirmation  he 
should  forthwith  resign.  1  cannot  forget  the 
indignant  comment  of  the  late  Mr.  Fessenden 
as  we  passed  out  of  the  Senate  Chamber,  im- 
mediately after  the  confirmation:  ''Who," 
said  he,  "  ever  heard  before  of  a  man  nomin- 
ated Secretary  of  State  merely  as  a  compli- 
ment ?"  But  this  is  only  another  case  of  the 
public  service  subordinated  to  personal  con- 
siderations. 

Not  only  in  the  Cabinet  but  in  other  offices 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  President 
has  been  under  the  influence  of  patrons. 
AVhy  was  he  so  blind  to  Thomas  Murphy? 
The  custom-house  of  New  York,  with  all  iis 
capacity  as  a  political  engine,  was  hatided 
over  to  this  agent,  whose  want  of  recognition 
in  the  Republican  party  was  outbalanced  by 
presidential  favor,  and  whose  gifts  have  be- 
come notorious.  And  when  the  demand  for 
his  removal  was  irresistible  the  President 
accepted  his  resignation  with  r>#i  effusion  of 
Beutiment  natural  toward  a  patron,  but  with- 
out justification  in  the  character  of  the  retiring 
officer. 

Shakspeare,  who  saw  intuitively  the  springs 


of  h'lman  conduct,  touches  more  than  once 
on  the  operation  of  the  gift.  "Til  do  thee 
service  for  so  good  a  gift,"  said  Gloster  to 
Warwick,  'l  lien,  again,  how  truly  spoke  the 
lord,  who  said  of  Tiinon, 

 "no  gift  to  him 

But  breeds  the  giver  a  return  exceeding 
All  use  of  quittance  ;" 

and  such  were  the  returns  made  by  the  Presi- 
dent. 

Thus  much  for  gift-taking,  reciprocated  by 
office.  The  instance  is  original  and  without 
precedent  in  our  history. 

THE  PRESIDENCY  A  PERQUISITE. 

I  have  now  completed  the  survey  of  the  two 
typical  instances — nepotism  and  gilt-takingoffi- 
cially  compensated — in  which  we  are  compelled 
to  see  the  President.  In  these  things  he  shows 
himself  Here  is  no  portrait  drawn  by  critic 
or  enemy;  it  is  the  original  who  stands  f)rth, 
saying.  Behold  the  generosity  1  practice  to 
my  relations  at  the  expense  of  the  public  ser- 
vice, also  the  gifts  1  take,  and  then  my  way  of 
rewarding  the  patrons  always  at  the  expense 
of  the  public  service."  In  this  open  exhibi- 
tion we  see  how  the  Presidency,  instead  of  a 
trust,  has  become  a  perquisite.  Bad  as  are 
these  two  capital  instances,  and  important  as 
is  their  condemnation,  so  that  they  may  net 
become  a  precedent,  I  dwell  on  them  now  as 
illustrating  character.  A  President  that  can 
do  such  things  and  not  recognize  at  once  the 
error  he  has  committed,  shows  that  super- 
eminence  of  egotism  under  which  Constitu- 
tion, international  Law,  and  municipal  law, 
to  say  nothing  of  Republican  Government  in 
its  primary  principles,  are  all  subordinated  to 
the  presidential  will,  and  this  is  personal  gov- 
ernment. Add  an  insensibility  to  the  honest 
convictions  of  others,  and  you  have  a  natural 
feature  of  this  pretension. 

INSTANCES. 

Lawyers  cite  what  are  called  "leading 
cases."  A  few  of  these  show  the  presidential 
will  iti  constant  operation  with  little  regard  to 
precedent  or  reason,  so  as  to  be  a  caprice,  if 
it  were  not  a  pretension.  Imitating  tlie  Popes 
in  nepotism,  the  President  has  imitated  them 
in  ostentatious  assumption  of  infallibility. 

THE  president's  INAUGURAL  ADDRESS. 

Other  Presidents  have  entered  upon  their 
high  office  with  a  certain  modesty  and  distrust. 
Washington  in  his  Inaugural  address  declared 
his  "anxieties,"  also  his  sense  of  "the  mag- 
nitude and  difficulty  of  the  trust" — "  awaken- 
ing a  distrustful  scrutiny  into  his  qualifica- 
tions." Jefferson  in  his  famous  Inaugural, 
so  replete  with  political  wisdom,  after  declaring 
his  "sincere  consciousness  that  the  task  is 
above  his  talents,"  s-iys: 

"  I  approach  it  with  those  anxious  and  awful  pre- 
sentiments which  the  greatness  of  the  charge  and  the 


17 


weakness  of  my  powers  so  justly  inspire,"  *  * 
*  *  "and  I  humble  myself  belore  the  mag- 
nitude of  the  undertaking." 

Our  soldier,  absolutely  untried  in  civil  life, 
entirely  a  new  man,  enfering  upon  the  su!'- 
limest  duties,  before  which  Washington  ar;  . 
Jefferson  had  shrunk,  said  in  his  Inaugural: 
"The  responsibilities  of  the  position  1  feel, 
but  accept  them  without  fear.'''  Great  prede- 
cessors, with  aiDple  preparation  for  the  re- 
sponsibilities, had  shrunk  back  with  fear.  He 
had  none.  Either  he  did  not  see  the  responsi- 
bilities, or  the  Ceesar  began  to  stir  in  his 
bosom. 

SELECTION'  OP  HIS  CABINET. 

Next  after  the  Inaugural  address,  his  first 
official  act  was  the  selection  of  his  Cabinet,  and 
here  the  general  disappointment  was  equaled 
by  the  general  wonder.  As  the  President 
was  little  known  except  from  the  victories 
which  had  comm^^tided  him.  it  was  not  then 
seen  how  completely  characteris  ic  was  this 
initial  act.  Looking  back  upon  it  we  recog- 
nize the  pretension  by  which  all  tradition, 
usage,  and  propriety  were  discarded,  by  which 
the  just  expecta  ions  of  the  party  that  had 
elected  him  were  set  at  naught,  and  the 
safeguards  of  constituiional  government  were 
subordinated  to  the  personal  pretensions  of 
One  Man.  In  this  Cabinet  were  persons 
having  small  relations  with  the  Republican 
parfy,  and  little  position  in  the  country,  some 
absolutely  without  claims  from  public  service, 
and  some  absolutely  disqualified  by  the  gifts 
they  had  made  to  the  President.  Such  was 
the  political  phenomenon  presented  for  the 
first  lime  in  American  history,  while  reported 
sayings  of  the  President  showed  the  simpli- 
city with  which  he  acted.  To  a  committee 
he  described  his  Cabinet  as  his  "family" 
with  which  no  stranger  could  be  allowed  to 
interfere,  and  to  a  member  of  Congress  he 
announced  that  he  selected  his  Cabinet  "to 
please  himself  and  nobody  else" — being  good 
rules  unquestionably  for  the  organization  of 
a  household  and  the  choice  of  domestics,  to 
which  the  Cabinet  seems  to  have  been  likened. 
This  personal  government  flowered  in  the 
Navy  Department,  wliere  a  gift-bearing  Greek 
was  suddenly  changed  to  a  Secretary.  No  less 
a  personage  than  ihe  grand  old  Admiral,  the 
brave,  yet  modest  Farragut,  was  reported  as 
askinsr,  on  the  5th  of  March,  the  veiy  day  when 
the  Cabinet  was  antiout»ced,  in  unatfected  igno- 
rance, "Do  you  know  anything  of  Borie?" 
And  yet  this  unconspicuous  citizen,  bearer  of 
gifts  to  the  President,  was  constituted  the 
naval  superior  of  that  historic  character.  If 
others  were  less  obscure,  the  Cabinet  asaunit 
was  none  the  less  notable  as  the  creafure  of 
presidential  will  where  chance  vied  with  lavor- 
ilism  as  arbiter. 

Ail  this  is  so  strange  when  we  consider  the 


true  idea  of  a  Cabinet.  Thongh  not  named  ia 
the  Cotis'itution,  yet  by  virtue  otuf)  broken  u-^age 
among  us,  and  in  harmony  wiili  constitutional 
;rovernments  everywhere,  the  Cabinet  has  be- 

-ne  a  constitutional  l)ody,  hardly  less  than  if 
CAi)ressly  established  by  the  Constitution  itself. 
Its  members,  besides  being  the  heads  of  great 
Def)arrments.  are  the  counselors  of  the  Presi- 
dent, with  the  duty  to  advise  him  of  all  matters 
within  the  sphere  of  his  office,  b^-ing  nothing 
less  thati  the  great  catalogue  in  the  preamble 
of  the  Constitution,  beginning  with  duty  to  ttio 
Union,  and  ending  with  the  duty  to  secure  the 
blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  pos- 
terity. Besides  undoubted  fimess  for  these 
exalted  responsibilities  as  head  of  a  Defiart- 
ment,  and  as  counselor,  a  member  should 
have  such  acknowledged  position  in  the  coun- 
try thai  his  presence  inspires  cotitidence  and 
gives  strength  #10  the  administration.  Wovr 
litile  these  things  were  regarded  by  the  Presi- 
dent need  not  be  said. 

Unquestionably  the  President  has  a  discre- 
tion in  the  appointment  of  his  Cabinet,  but  it 
is  a  constii uiional  discretion,  regulated  by 
regard  for  the  interests  of  the  country,  and  not 
by  mere  personal  will  ;  by  statesmanship  and, 
not  by  favoritism.  A  Cabinet  is  a  national 
institution  and  not  a  presidential  perquisite, 
unless  our  President  is  allowed  to  copy  the 
example  of  imperial  France.  In  all  consti- 
tutional governtnents,  the  Cabinet  is  selected 
on  public  reasons,  and  with  a  single  eye  to 
the  public  servic-" ;  it  is  noi  in  any  respect  the 
"  family  "  of  the  sovereign,  nor  is  it  "  to  please 
himself  and  nobody  else."  English  monarcha 
have  often  accepted  statesmen  personally  dis- 
agreeable when  they  had  become  representa- 
tives of  the  prevailing  party,  as  when  George 
111,  the  most  obstinate  of  rulers,  accepted  Fox, 
and  George  IV,  as  prejudiced  as  his  father 
was  obstinate,  accepted  Canning,  each  bring- 
ing to  the  service  commanding  abilities.  It 
is  related  that  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  with 
military  frankness,  encountered  the  personal 
objections  of  the  King  in  the  latter  case  by 
saying,  *•  Your  Majesty  is  the  sovereigti  of 
England,  with  duties  to  your  people  far  above 
any  to  yourself;  and  these  duties  render  it 
ioftperative  that  you  should  ai  this  time 
employ  the  abilities  of  the  country."  By  such 
instances  in  a  constitutional  government  is 
the  Cabinet  fixed  as  a  consiituiional  and  not 
a  personal  body.  It  is  only  by  some  extraor- 
dinary hallucination  that  the  President  of  a 
Republic  dedicated  to  constitutional  iibertj 
can  imagine  himself  iin^'ested  with  a  transform- 
ing prerogative  above  that  of  any  English  sov- 
ereign, by  which  his  cojuselors  are  changed 
from  {)ublic  otficers  to  personal  attendants, 
and  a  great,  constitutional  body,  in  which  all 
citizens  have  a  common  interest,  is  made  a 
perquisite  of  the  President. 


18 


APPROPRIATION  OP  TlIK  OFPICKS. 

Markpcl  araon^  the  spectacles  which  fol- 
lowed. an<l  kindred  in  character  wiih  the  appro- 
priation oflhe  Cabinet  as  individual  property, 
■was  the  appropriation  of  the  offices  of  the 
country,  to  which  I  r^fer  in  this  place  even  at 
the  expense  of  repetition.  Obscure  and  unde- 
serving relations,  marriage  connections,  per- 
sonal retainers,  Army  associates,  friends  of 
unknown  fame  and  notable  only  as  personal 
friends  or  friends  of  his  relations,  evidently 
absorbed  the  presidential  mind  during  those 
months  of  obdurate  reticence  when  a  generous 
people  supposed  the  Cabinet  to  be  the  all- 
absorbing  thought.  Judging  by  the  facts,  it 
would  seem  as  if  the  chief  and  most  spontan- 
eous thought  was  how  to  exploit  the  appoint- 
ing power  to  his  own  personal  behoof.  At  this 
period  the  New  York  custom-house  presented 
itself  to  the  imaginaiion,  and  §  letter  was  writ- 
ten consigning  a  military  dependent  to  the 
generosity  of  the  collector.  You  know  the 
rest.  Dr.  Johnson,  acting  as  executor  in  sell- 
ing the  distillery  of  Mr.  Thrale,  said,  "  We 
are  not  selling  a  parcel  of  tubs  and  vats  ;  we 
are  selling  the  potentiality  of  growing  rich 
beyond  the  dreams  of  avarice."  Jf  the  Presi- 
dent did  not  use  the  sounding  phrase  of  the 
great  English  moralist,  it  is  evident  that  his 
military  dependent  felt  in  that  letter  all  the 
"  potentiality"  advertised  in  the  earlier  case, 
and  acted  accordingly. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  say  that  in  these 
things  there  was  departure  from  the  require- 
ments of  law,  whether  in  the  appointment  of 
his  Cabinet  or  of  personal  favorites,  even  in 
return  for  personal  benelacrions,  although  it 
was  plainly  unrepublican,  offensive,  and  inde- 
fensible ;  but  this  same  usurping  spirit,  born 
of  an  untutored  egotism,  brooking  no  restraint, 
showed  itself  in  another  class  of  transactions, 
to  which  I  have  already  referred,  where  law 
and  Constitution  wer»  little  regirded. 

PBKSIDKNTIAL    ASSAULT    ON    SAFEGUARD    OP  THK 
TREASUUY. 

First  in  time  and  very  indigenous  in  char- 
acter was  the  presidential  attempt  against  one 
of  the  sacred  safeguards  of  the  Treasury,  the 
original  workmanship  of  Alexander  Hamilton, 
being  nothing  less  than  tiie  *'  act  to  establish  the 
Treasury  Department."  Here  was  an  import- 
ant provision  that  no  person  appointed  to  any 
office  instituted  by  the  act  "  shall  directly  or 
indirectly  be  concerned  or  interested  in  car- 
rying on  the  business  of  trade  or  commerce," 
and  any  person  so  offending  was  declared 
guilty  of  a  high  misdemeanor,  and  was  to  for- 
feit to  the  United  States  $3,000,  with  removal 
from  office,  and  forever  thereafter  to  be  inca- 
pable of  hoiding  any  office  under  the  United 
Slates.  { Statutes- at -Large^  Vol.  1,  p.  G7, 
tSeptember  2,  178'J.)  From  the  beginn  ng  this 
Statute  had  stood  unquestioned,  until  it  had 


acquired  the  character  of  fundamental  law. 
And  yet  the  President,  by  a  special  message 
dated  .March  6,  18(39,  being  the  second  day  of 
his  first  service  as  a  civilian,  asked  Congress 
to  set  it  aside  so  as  to  enable  Mr.  Stewart,  of 
New  York,  already  nominated  and  confirmed 
as  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  to  enter  upon 
the  duties  of  this  office.  This  gentleman  was 
unquestionably  the  largest  merchant  who  had 
transacted  business  in  our  country,  and  his 
imports  were  of  such  magnitude  as  to  clog 
the  custom  house.  If  the  statute  was  any- 
thing but  one  of  those  cob-webs  which  catch 
the  weak  but  yield  to  the  rich,  this  was  the 
occasion  for  it,  and  the  President  should  have 
yielded  to  no  temptation  against  it.  The  inde- 
corum of  his  effort  stands  out  more  painfully 
when  it  is  considered  that  the  merchant  for 
whom  he  wished  to  set  aside  a  time-honored 
safeguard  was  one  of  those  from  whom  he  had 
received  gifts. 

Such  was  the  accommodating  disposition  of 
the  Senate,  that  a  bill  exempting  the  presi- 
dential benefactor  from  the  operation  of  the 
statute  was  promptly  introduced,  and  evea 
read  twice,  until,  as  it  seemed  about  to  pass, 
I  felt  it  my  duty  to  object  to  its  consideration, 
saying,  according  to  the  Globe,  "1  think  it 
ought  to  be  most  profoundly  considered  before 
it  is  acted  on  by  the  Senate."  This  objection 
caused  its  postponement.  The  country  was 
startled.  By  telegraph  the  general  anxiety 
was  communicated  to  Washington.  At  the 
next  meeting  of  the  Senate,  three  days  later, 
the  President  sent  a  message  requesting  per- 
mission to  withdraw  the  former  message.  But 
he  could  not  withdraw  the  impression  produced 
by  such  open  disregard  of  the  law  to  pro- 
mote his  personal  desire. 

ILLEGAL  MILITARY  RING  AT  EXECUTIVE  MANSION. 

The  military  spirit  which  failed  in  the  effort 
to  set  aside  a  fundamental  law  as  if  it  were  a 
transient  order  was  more  successful  at  the 
Executive  Mansion,  which  at  once  assumed 
the  character  of  military  headquarters.  To 
the  dishonor  of  the  civil  service  and  in  total  dis- 
regard of  precedent,  the  President  surrounded 
himself  with  officers  of  the  Army,  and  substi- 
tuted military  forms  for  those  of  civil  life, 
detailing  for  this  service  members  of  his  late 
staff.  Tne  earliest  public  notice  of  this  mili- 
tary occupation  appeared  in  the  Daily  Morn- 
ing Chronicle  of  March  8,  18G9,  understood 
to  be  the  official  organ  of  the  Administration  : 

"Presiaerit  Grant  was  not  at  the  White  Uuude 
yesterday,  but  the  following  members  of  his  staff 
were  oceups'ing  the  Secretaries'  rooms  and  acting  as 
such :  Generals  Babcock,  Porter.  Badeau,  and  Dent." 

This  is  to  be  regarded  not  only  in  its  strange 
blazonry  of  the  presidential  pretension,  but 
also  as  the  first  apparition  of  that  minor  mili- 
tary  ring  in  whicli  the  President  has  lived  ever 
since. 


19 


Thus  installed,  Army  officers  became  secre 
taries  of  the  President,  delivering  his  messages 
to  both  Houses  of  Congress,  and  even  autlien- 
ticating  presidential  acts  as  if  thev  were  mili- 
tary orders.  Here,  for  instance,  is  an  official 
communication : 

ExRCUTiVE  Maxsion,  Marchlo,  1869. 
To  RoBKRT  Martin  Douglas,  esq. : 

Sir:  You  are  hereby  appointee!  Assistant  Private 
Secretary  to  the  President,  to  date  from  March  15. 
1869. 

By  order  of  the  President. 

nOTlACE  POKTER. 
Brevet  Brioudier  General,  Secretary. 

Mark  the  words,  "by  order  of  the  Presi- 
dent," and  then  thesignature,  "  Horace  Porter, 
Brevet  Brigadier  General,  Secretary." 

Tlie  presidential  pretension  which  T  exhibit  | 
on  the  simple  facts,  besides  being  of  doubtful  ' 
legality  to  say  the  least,  was  f)f  evil  example, 
demoralizitig  alike  to  the  military  and  civil 
service,  and  an  undoubted  reproach  to  repub- 
lican institutions  in  that  primary  principle, 
announced  by  Jefferson  in  liis  first  Inaugural 
Address,  "  the  supremacy  of  the  civil  over  the 
military  authority."  It  seemed  only  to  remain 
that  the  President  should  sign  his  messages 

Commander-in  Cliief  of  the  Army  of  the 
United  States  "  Evidently  a  new  order  of 
things  had  arrived. 

Observe  the  mildness  of  my  language  when 
I  call  this  presidential  pretension  of  doubt- 
ful legality.  The  law  shall  speak  for  itself 
Obviously  it  was  the  same  for  our  military 
President  as  for  his  predecessors,  and  it  was 
recent  also  : 

"  The  President  is  hereby  authorized  to  appoint  a 
priviite  secretary  at  an  annual  salary  of  83.51)0.  an 
assistant  secretary  at  an  annunl  salary  of  82,500. 
a  short-hand  writer  at  an  annual  salary  of  82.5U0,  a 
clerk  of  p;irdons  at  an  annual  snlary  of  S2.000,  and 
three  clfrks  of  the  fourth  class." — Siatuten  at  Large, 
Vol.  XIV,  p.  206. 

It  cannot  be  doubted  that  this  provision  was 
more  than  ample,  for  Congress  by  act  of  July 
23,  18G8,  repealed  so  much  as  authorized  a 
clerk  of  pardons,  and  also  one  of  ihe  three 
cleriss  of  the  fourth  class.  Therefore,  there 
could  be  no  necessity  for  a  levy  of  soldiers  to 
perform  the  duties  of  secretaries,  and  the  con- 
duct of  the  President  can  be  explained  only 
by  the  supposition  that  he  preferred  to  be  sur- 
rounded by  Army  officers  rather  than  civilians, 
continuing  in  the  Executive  Mansion  the  tra- 
ditions ot  headquarters — all  of  which,  though 
agreeable  to  hiui  and  illustrating  his  character, 
was  an  anomaly  and  a  scandal. 

lu  extenuation  of  this  indefensible  preten- 
sion, we  have  been  reminded  of  two  things: 
first,  that  according  to  tlie  record  Washington 
sent  his  first  message  by  General  Knox,  when 
in  fact  General  Knox  held  no  military  office 
at  that  time,  but  was  actually  Secretary  of 
War;  and  s^^C0ll^ly,  that  the  military  officers 
now  occupying  the  Executive  Mansion,  are 
detailed  for  this  service  without  other  salary 


than  that  of  their  grade.  As  the  Knox  prece- 
dent is  moonshine,  the  minor  military  ring  can 
be  vindicated  only  as  a  ''detail "  for  service  in 
f'he  Executive  Mansion. 

Here  again  tlje  law  sliall  speak.  By  act  of 
Congress  of  March  3,  1863,  it  is  [)rovided  thab 
'•details  to  special  service  shall  only  hn  made 
with  the  const-nt  of  the  commjinding  officer  of 
foices  in  the  field;  "  but  this,  it  will  be  seen, 
reefers  to  a  state  of  war.  Congress  bv  act  of 
July  IG,  18GG,  authorized  the  President  "ta 
detail  from  the  Army  all  the  officers  and  agents 
of  this  Bureau."  [for  the  relief  of  Freedmen  and 
Refugees.]  {Statutes- at-  Large.  Vol.  XIV,  p. 
174;)  also  by  act  of  July  28,  18G8,  to  '"detail" 
officers  of  the  Army,  not  exceeding  twenty  at 
any  time,  to  act  as  President,  Superin'end^-nt, 
or  Professor  in  certain  colleges.  {Ibid  ,  Vol. 
XIV,  p.  33G.)  And  then  again  by  act  of  July 
15,  1870,  it  provided  that  "any  retired  officer 
may,  on  his  own  application,  be  detailed  to 
serve  as  professor  in  any  college."  {Ibid., 
Vol.  XVI,  p.  320  )  As  there  is  no  other  stat- 
ute auihorizing  details,  this  exceptional  trans- 
fer of  Army  officers  to  the  Executive  M-insion 
can  be  maintained  only  on  some  undefined 
prerogative. 

The  presidential  pretension,  which  is  con- 
tinued to  the  pre.setit  time,  is  the  more  unnat- 
ural when  it  is  considered  that  there  are  at 
least  three  different  statutes  in  which  Congress 
has  shown  its  purpose  to  limit  the  employment 
of  military  officers  in  civil  service.  As  long 
ago  as  July  5,  1838,  it  was  positively  provided 
that  no  Army  officers  should  be  st^iarated 
from  their  regiments  and  corps  "for  employ- 
ment on  civil  works  of  internal  im})roveineut 
or  be  allowed  to  engage  in  the  service  of  in- 
corporated companies;"  nor  any  line  officer 
to  be  acting  paymaster  or  disbursing  agent 
for  the  Indian  d^-partment,  "if  such  extra 
employment  require  that  he  be  separated  from 
his  regiment  or  company  or  otherwise  inter- 
fere with  the  performance  of  the  military  duties 
proper."  {Statutes  at  Large,  Vol.  V,  p.  2G0  ) 
Obviously  the  will  of  Congress  is  here  declared 
that  officers  should  not  be  allowed  to  leave 
their  posts  for  any  service  which  might  inter- 
fere with  the  performance  of  the  viilitary 
duties  proper.  This  language  is  explicit. 
Then  came  the  act  of  March  30,  18G7,  which 
provides  that  ''any  officer  of  the  Army  or 
Navy  of  the  United  States  who  shall,  after 
tlie  passage  of  this  act,  accept  or  hold  any 
appointment  in  the  diplomatic  or  consular  ser* 
vice  of  the  Government,  shall  be  considered 
as  having  resigned  his  said  office,  and  the  place 
held  by  mm  in  the  military  or  naval  service  shall 
be  deemed  and  taken  to  be  vacant."  {Ibid.f 
Vol.  XV,  p.  12-5.)  To  a  considerate  and  cir- 
cumspect President  who  recognized  the  law 
in  its  spirit  as  well  as  its  letter  th  s  provision, 
especially  when  reenlorced  by  the  earlier  stat- 
ute, would  have  been  a  rule  of  action  in  anal- 


20 


ogous  cases,  and  therefore  an  insurmountable 
obstacle  to  a  pretension  which  takes  Army 
otficers  from  their  proper  duties  and  makes 
them  presidential  secretaries.  A  later  statute 
adds  to  the  obstacle.  By  act  of  Congress  of 
July  15,  1870,  it  is  provided — 

"That  it  shnll  not  be  lawful  for  any  oflacer  of  the 
Army  of  the  United  States  on  the  active  list  to  hold 
anu  civil  office,  whether  by  election  or  appointment,  and 
any  such  ollicer  accepting  or  ejcerciting  the  functions 
of  a  civil  o^ici-shall  at  once  cease  to  be  an  officer  of 
the  Army,  .ind  hiscomiuission  shnll  be  vncated  there- 
by."—•i>''«'«'<''«-«<-/''i'-oe.  Vol.  XVI,  p.  319. 

It  is  difficult  to  imagine  anything  plainer  than 
these  words.  No  Army  officer  not  on  the 
retired  list  can  hold  any  civil  office;  and  then 
to  enforce  the  iniiibition,  it  is  provided  that  in 
"  accep'ing  or  evercising  the  funciiotis''  of 
such  office  the  commission  is  vacated.  Now, 
the  Blue  Book,  which  is  our  political  almanac, 
has  under  the  head  of  "Executive  Mansion," 
a  list  of  "secretaries  and  clerks,"  be*gimiing 
as  follows:  "  Secretaries,  General  F.  T.  Dent, 
General  Horace  Porter,  General  0.  E.  Bab- 
cock,"  when,  in  fact,  there  are  no  such  offi- 
cers authorized  by  law.  Then  follow  the 
''Private  Secretary,"  "Assistant  Private  Sec- 
retary," and  "Executive  Clerks,"  authorized 
by  law,  but  placed  below  those  unauthorized. 
Nothing  is  said  of  being  detailed  for  this  pur- 
pose. They  are  openly  called  "  Secretaries," 
which  is  a  title  of  office;  and  since  it  is  at  the 
Executive  Mansion,  it  must  be  a  civil  office; 
and  yet,  in  defiance  of  law,  these  Army  officers 
continue  to  exercise  its  functions,  and  some 
of  them  enter  the  Senate  with  messages  from 
the  President,  The  apology  that  they  are 
"detailed  "  for  this  service  is  vain;  no  author- 
ity can  be  shown  for  it.  But  how  absurd  to 
suppose  that  a  rule  against  the  ext^rcise  of  a 
civil  office  can  be  evaded  by  a  "detail."  If 
it  may  be  done  for  three  Army  officers  why 
not  for  tiirpe  dozen?  Nay  moie.  if  the  civil 
office  of  Secretary  at  the  Executive  Mansion 
may  be  created  without  law,  why  not  some 
other  civil  office?  Atjd  what  is  to  hinder  the 
President  from  surrounding  himself  not  only 
with  Secretaries, but  with  messengers, stewards, 
ar»d  personal  attendants,  even  a  body  guard,  all 
detailed  from  the  Army  ?  Why  may  he  not  en- 
large the  military  circle  at  the  Executive  Man- 
sion indehnitely  ?  If  the  President  can  be  jus- 
tified in  his  present  course,  ihere  is  no  limit  to 
bis  pretensions  in  open  violation  of  the  statute. 
Here  the  Blue  Book  testifies  a}?ain,  for  it  records 
the  names  of  the  "  Secretaries"  in  their  proper 
places  as  Army  officers,  thus  prssenting  them 
as  holding  two  incompatible  offices. 

I  dismiss  this  transaction  as  another  instance 
of  presidential  pretension  which,  in  the  in- 
terest of  republican  governmsnt,  should  be 
arrested, 

fllNUEPUBLICAX  SUBORDINATION  OP  THE  WAR  DEPAET- 
ilKNT  TO  TUK  GKNKRAL-lN-CillLK. 

From  the  Executive  Mansion,  pass  now  to 


the  War  Department,  and  there  we  witness 
the  same  presidential  pretensions  by  which 
law,  usage,  and  correct  principle  are  lost  in 
the  will  of  One  Man.  The  suprenncy  of  the 
civil  power  over  the  military  is  t) pitied  in  the 
Secretary  of  War,  a  civilian,  from  whom  Army 
officers  receive  orders.  But  this  beautiful  rule, 
with  its  lesson  of  subordination  to  the  military 
was  suddenly  set  aside  by  our  President,  and  i  h© 
Secretary  of  War  degraded  to  be  a  clerk.  The 
6th  of  March  witnessed  a  most  important  order 
from  the  President  reconstituting  the  military 
departments  covering  the  southern  States  and 
placing  them  under  officers  of  his  choice,  which 
purported  to  be  signed  by  the  Adjutant  Gen- 
eral, by  command  of  the  General  of  the  Army, 
but  actually  ignoring  the  Secretary  of  VV^ar. 
Three  days  later  witnessed  another  order  pro- 
fessing to  proceed  from  the  President,  whereby 
in  express  tertns  the  War  Department  was  sub- 
ordinated to  the  General-in-Chief,  being  Wil- 
liam T.  Sherman,  who  at  the  time  was  promoted 
to  that  command.  Here  are  the  words:  "The 
chiefs  of  staff,  corps,  departments,  and  bureaus 
will  report  to  and  act  under  the  immediate 
orders  of  the  General  commanding  the  Army." 
This  act  of  revolution,  exalting  the  military 
power  above  the  civil,  showed  instant  fruits 
in  an  order  of  the  General,  who,  upon  assum- 
ing command,  proceeded  to  place  the  several 
bureau  officers  of  the  War  Department  upon 
his  military  staff,  so  that  for  the  time  there 
was  a  military  dictatorship  with  the  President 
as  its  head  not  merely  in  spirit,  but  in  actual 
lorm.  By  and  by  John  A.  iiawlins,  a  civilian 
by  education  and  a  respecter  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, became  Secretary  of  War,  and,  though 
bound  to  the  President  by  personal  ties,  he 
said  "  check  to  the  King."  By  General  Order, 
issued  from  the  War  Department  March  26, 
1869,  and  signed  by  the  Secretary  of  War,  the 
offensive  order  was  rescinded,  and  it  was 
etijoined  that  "all  official  business  which  by 
law  or  regulation  requires  the  action  of  the 
President  or  Secretary  of  War  will  be  submitted 
by  the  chiefs  of  staff,  corps,  departments,  and 
bureaus  to  the  Secretary  of  War."  Public 
report  said  that  this  restoration  of  the  civil 
power  to  its  rightful  supremacy  was  not  ob- 
tained without  an  intimation  of  resignation  on 
the  part  of  the  Secretary. 

THE  SECRETARY  OF  THE  NAVY  BY  DEPUTY. 

Kindred  in  character  was  the  unprecedented 
attempt  to  devolve  the  duties  of  the  Navy 
Department  upon  a  deputy,  so  that  orders  were 
to  be  signed  "  A.  E.  Borie,  Secretary  of  the 
Navy,  perD.  D.  Porter,  Admiral,"  as  appears 
in  the  official  journal  of  May  11,  18(39,  or, 
according  to  another  instance,  "Daniel  D. 
Porter,  Vice  Admiral,  for  the  Secretary  of  the 
Navy."  The  obvious  object  of  this  illegal 
arrangement  was  to  enable  the  incumbent, 
who  stood  high  on  the  list  of  gift  makers,  to 


21 


be  Secretary  without  being  troubled  with  the 
bu.siness  of  the  office.  Notoriout^ly  he  was  an 
invalid  unused  to  public  business,  who,  accord- 
ing to  liis  own  confession,  modestly  pleaded 
that  he  could  t)ot  apfily  himself  to  work  more 
than  an  hour  a  day  ;  but  the  President  soothed 
his  anxieties  by  promising  a  deputy  who  would 
do  the  work.  And  thus  was  this  great  Depart- 
ment made  a  plaything  ;  but  public  opinion 
and  other  counsels  arrested  the  sport.  Here 
I  mention  that  when  this  incumbent  left  his 
important  post  it  is  understood  that  he  was 
allowed  to  nominate  his  successor. 

PRKSIDEXTIAL  PRETENSION  AT  THE  INDIAN  BUREAU. 

At  the  same  time  occurred  the  effort  to 
absorb  the  Indian  Bureau  into  the  War 
Department,  changing  iis  character  as  part  of 
the  civil  service.  Congress  had  already  repu- 
diated such  an  attempt,  but  the  President,  not 
dislieartened  by  legislative  failure,  sought  to 
accomplish  it  by  manipulation  and  indir^-ction. 
First  elevating  a  member  of  his  late  staff  to  the 
head  of  the  bureau,  he  then  by  a  military 
order,  dated  May  7,  18G9,  proceeded  to  detail 
for  the  Indian  service  a  long  list  of  "officers 
left  out  of  their  regimental  organization  by  the 
consolidation  of  the  infantry  regiments," 
assuming  to  do  this  by  authority  of  the  act  of 
Congress  of"  June  30,  1834,  which,  after  declar- 
ing the  number  of  Indian  agents  and  how 
they  shall  be  appointed,  providesthat  itshall 
be  competent  for  the  President  to  require  any 
military  officer  of  the  United  States  to  execute 
thedutiesof  Indian  agent."  {Statides-at-Large 
Vol.  IV,  p.  73G.)  Obviously  this  provision 
had  reierence  to  some  exceptional  exigency 
and  can  be  no  authority  Ibr  the  general  sub- 
stitute of  military  officers  instead  of  civilians 
contirmed  by  the  Senate  and  bound  Avilh 
sureties  for  the  faithlul  discharge  of  their 
duties.  And  yet  upward  of  sixty  Army 
officers  were  in  this  way  foisted  into  the 
Indian  service.  I  he  act  of  Congress  of  July 
15,  1870,  already  quoted,  creating  an  incom- 
patibility between  military  service  and  civil, 
was  aimed  partly  at  this  abuse,  and  these 
officers  ceased  to  be  Indian  agents.  But  this 
attempt  is  another  illustration  of  presidential 
pretension. 

MILITARY  INTERFERENCE  AT  ELECTIONS. 

Then  followed  military  interference  in  elec- 
tions, and  the  repeated  use  of  the  military  in  aid 
of  the  Revenue  Law  under  circumstances  of 
doubtful  legality,  until  at  last  General  Halleck 
and  General  Sherman  protested  ;  the  former, 
in  his  report  of  October  24,  1870,  sayitig,  "  1 
respectfully  repeat  the  recommendation  of  my 
last  annual  report,  that  military  officers  should 
not  interfere  in  local  civil  difficulties,  unless 
called  out  in  the  manner  provided  by  law;" 
and  the  latter,  in  his  report  of  November  10, 
1870,  "I  think  the  soldiers  ought  not  to  be 
expected  to  make  individual  arrests,  or  to  do 


any  act  of  violence  except  in  their  capacity  as 
a  posse  comilatus  duly  summoned  by  the 
United  States  marshal  and  acting  in  his  per- 
sotial  presence."  And  so  this  military  pre- 
tension, invading  civil  affairs,  was  arrested. 

PRESIDENTIAL  PRETENSION  AGAIN. 

Meanwhile  this  same  presidential  usurpation 
subordinating  all  to  himself,  became  palpable 
in  another  form.  It  whs  said  of  Gustavus 
Adolphus  that  he  drilled  his  Diet  to  vote  at  the 
word  of  command.  Such  at  the  outset  seemed 
to  be  the  presidential  policy  with  regard  to 
Congress,  We  were  to  vote  as  he  desired.  He 
did  not  like  the  tenure  of  office  act,  and  dur- 
inj;  the  first  month  of  his  administration  his 
influence  was  felt  in  both  branches  of  Cottgresa 
to  secure  its  repeal — all  of  which  seemed  more 
astonishing  when  it  was  considered  that  he  en- 
tered upon  his  high  trust  with  the  ostentatious 
avowal  that  all  laws  would  be  faithfully  exe- 
cuted whether  they  met  his  approval  or  not, 
and  that  he  should  have  no  policy  to  enforce 
against  the  will  of  the  people.  That  beneficent 
statute  which  he  had  upheld  in  the  impeach- 
ment of  President  Johnson  was  a  limitation 
on  the  presidential  power  of  appointment,  and 
he  could  not  brook  it.  Here  was  plain  inter- 
feretice  wiih  his  great  perquisite  of  office,  and 
Congress  must  be  coerced  to  repeal  it.  The 
House  acted  promptly  and  passed  tlie  desired 
bill.  In  the  Senate  there  was  delay  and  a 
protracted  debate,  during  which  the  official 
journal  announced: 

**The  President,  in  conversation  with  a  prominent 
Senator  a  few  days  since,  declared  that  it  was  his 
intention  not  to  send  in  any  nomination  until  defin- 
ite action  was  taken  by  Congress  upon  the  teuure- 
of-oflice  bill." 

Here  I  venture  to  add  that  a  member  of  the 
Cabinet  pressed  me  to  withdraw  my  opposition 
to  the  repeal,  saying  that  the  President  felt 
strongly  upon  it.  I  could  not  understand  how  a 
Republican  President  could  consetit  to  weaken 
the  limitations  upon  the  Executive,  and  so  I 
said,  adding,  that  in  my  judgment  he  should 
rather  reach  forth  his  hands  and  ask  to  have 
them  tied.  Better  always  a  government  of  law 
than  of  men. 

PRESIDENTIAL  INTERFERENCE  IN  LOCAL  POLITICS. 

In  this  tyrannical  spirit,  and  iti  the  assump- 
tion of  his  centra!  imperialism,  he  has  inter- 
fered with  political  questions  and  party  move- 
ments in  distant  States,  reaching  into  Missouri 
and  then  into  New  York  to  dictate  how  the 
people  should  vote,  then  manipulating  Louis- 
iana through  a  broiher-in  law  appointed  col- 
lector. With  him  a  custom-house  seems  less 
a  place  for  the  collection  ot'  revenue  than  an 
engine  of  political  influence  through  which  his 
dictatorship  may  be  mainta  ned. 

Authentic  tesiimony  places  this  tyrannical 
abuse  beyond  question.  New  York  is  the 
scene  and   Thomas  Murphy,  collector,  the 


22 


Presidential  lieutenant.  Nobody  doubts  the 
intimacy  between  the  Presideiit  and  the  eol- 
leeior,  who  are  bound  in  friendship  by  other 
ties  than  those  of  sea  side  tteighborhood.  The 
collector  was  determined  to  ol)tain  the  contri)! 
of  the  Republican  Slate  convention,  and  ap- 
pealed to  a  patriot  citizen  for  help,  who  re- 
plied that  in  his  judt>ment  "it  would  be  a 
delicate  matter  for  office  holders  to  undertake 
to  dictate  to  the  associations  in  the  different 
districts  who  should  go  from  them  to  the  Stale 
convention,  and  still  more  delicate  to  attempt 
to  control  the  judgments  of  men  employed 
in  the  different  departments  as  to  the  best 
men  to  represent  them."  The  brave  collector 
lieutenant  of  the  President  said  "that  he 
should  not  hesitate  to  do  it;  that  it  was  Gen- 
eral Grant's  wish,  and  General  Grant  was  the 
head  of  the  Republican  party,  and  should 
be  authority  on  this  subject."  (iVeMJ  York 
Custom-  J  louse  Investigation,  Vol.  1,  p.  581. 
Te>timony  of  General  Palmer.)  Plainly,  the 
Kepuhlican  party  was  his  perquisite,  and  all 
Republicans  were  to  do  his  bidding.  From 
the  same  testimony  it  appears  that  the  Presi 
dent,  according  to  the  statement  of  his  lieu 
tenant,  "wanted  to  be  represented  in  the  con- 
ventii)n,"  being  the  Republican  State  conven- 
tion of  New  York  ;  "  wanted  to  have  his  Iriends 
therein  the  convention;"  and  the  presiden- 
tial lieutenant,  being  none  other  than  the 
famous  collector,  offered  to  appoint  four  men 
in  the  custom-house  if  the  witness  would  secure 
the  nomination  of  certain  persons  as  delegates 
from  his  district,  and  he  promised  "  lhat  he 
would  immediately  send  their  names  on  to 
Washington  and  have  ihem  appointed."  {Ibid., 
p.  02G.  Testimony  of  William  Aikinson.)  And 
so  the  presidential  dictatorship  was  admin- 
istered. Offices  in  the  custom  house  were 
openly  bartered  for  votes  in  the  Stale  conven 
tion.  Here  was  intolerable  tyranny,  with  de- 
moralizaiion  like  that  of  the  slave  market. 
But  New  York  is  not  the  only  scene  of  this 
outrage.  'J'he  presidential  pretension  extends 
everywhere;  nor  is  it  easy  to  measure  ihe 
arrogance  of  corruption  or  the  honest  indigna- 
tion ii  quickens  inio  life. 

PRESIDENTIAL  CONTRIVANCE  AGAINST  ST.  DOMINGO. 

These  presidential  pretensions  in  all  their 
variety,  personal  and  military,  with  reckless 
inditference  to  law,  naturally  ripened  in  the 
contrivance,  nursed  in  hot-house  secrecy, 
against  the  peace  of  the  island  of  St.  Do 
mmgo — 1  say  deliberately,  against  the  peace 
of  that  island,  for  under  the  guise  of  annex- 
ing a  poriiun  there  was  menace  to  the 
Black  Republic  of  ilayti.  This  whole  busi- 
ness, absolutely  indefensible  from  beginning 
to  end,  being  wrong  at  every  point,  is  the  spe- 
cial and  most  characteristic  product  of  the 
Administration,  into  which  it  infused  and  pro- 
jected itself  more  thau  into  anyihiug  else.  In 


this  multiform  disobedience  we  behold  our 
President.  Already  I  have  referred  to  this 
contrivance  as  marking  an  epoch  in  [tresiden- 
lial  pretensions.  It,  is  my  du'y  now  lo  show 
its  true  character  as  a  warning  against  its 
author. 

A  few  weeks  only  after  beginning  his  career 
asacivilian,  and  while  occupied  with  military 
usurpations  and  the  perquisites  of  office,  he  was 
tempted  by  overtures  of  Dominican  plotters, 
headed  by  the  usurper  Baez  aiid  the  specu- 
lator Cazneau,  the  first  an  a<lventurer,  con- 
spirator, and  trickster,  described  by  one  who 
knows  him  well  as  "the  worst  man  living  of 
whom  he  has  any  personal  knowh-dge,"  and 
the  second,  one  of  our  own  countrymen  long 
resident  on  the  island,  known  as  disloyal 
throughout  the  war,  and  entirely  kindred  ia 
character  to  Baez.  Listening  lo  ihese  prompt- 
ers, and  without  one  word  in  Congress  or  in 
the  press  suggesting  annexion  of  the  island 
or  any  part  of  it,  the  President  began  his  con- 
trivance, and  here  we  see  abuse  in  every  form 
and  at  every  step,  absolutely  without  prece- 
dent in  our  history. 

The  agent  in  this  transaction  was  OrvilleE. 
Babcock,  a  young  officer  figuring  in  the  Blue 
Book  of  the  lime  as  one  of  the  unauthorized 
"secretaries"  at  the  Executive  Mansioti,  atid 
also  as  a  major  of  engineers  His  imltlished 
instructions  under  dat-e  of  July  17,  ISG'J.  were 
simply  to  make  inquiries  ;  but  the  f)lo'  appears 
in  a  communication  of  the  same  date  fr^m  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy,  directed  to  i he  Semi- 
nole, a  wa,r-ship,  with  an  armament  of  one 
eleven-inch  gun  and  four  thiny-two  pound- 
ers, to  give  him  the  moral  support  of  its 
guns ;"  and  this  was  followed  by  a  telegraphic 
instruction  to  Key  West  for  another  war-ship 
"to  proceed  without  a  moment's  delay  to  San 
Domingo  City,  to  be  placed  at  the  disposal  of 
General  Babcock  while  on  that  coast."  Wiih 
such  "  moral  support"  the  emissary  of  the 
President  obtained  from  the  usurper  Baez  that 
famous  protocol  stipulating  the  annexion  of 
Dominica  to  the  United  States  in  considera- 
tion of  $1,500,000,  which  the  young  officer, 
fresh  from  the  Executive  Mansion,  professed 
to  execute  as  ''Aid  de- Camp  of  his  Excellency 
(Jeneral  Ulysses  S.  Grant,  President  of'  the 
United  States,"  as  if,  instead  of  Chief  Magis- 
trate of  a  Republic,  the  Presitient  were  a  mil- 
itary chiefta.n  with  his  foot  in  ihe  stirru[),  sur- 
ri>uiidetl  by  a  military  staff.  The  same  instru- 
ment contained  the  unblushing  stipulation  that 
"his  Excellency  General  Grant,  President  of 
the  Unitrd  States,  promises  prioafeli/  to  use 
all  his  injluence  in  order  that  ttie  idea  of 
annexing  the  Dominican  Republic  to  the 
Unittd  States  may  acquire  such  a  degree  of 
popularity  among  the  members  of  Congress 
as  will  be  necessary  lor  iis  acrornplishmeni ," 
which  is  simply  that  the  President  shall  become 
a  lobbyist  to  bniig  about  the  annexion  by 


23 


Congress.  Such  was  the  strange  beginning, 
illegal,  unconstitutional,  and  otfensive  in  every 
particular,  but  showing  the  presidential  char- 
acter. 

On  his  return  to  Washington  the  young  offi- 
cer, who  had  assumed  to  be  "Aid-de-Camp 
of  his  Excellency  General  Ulysses  S.  Grant" 
and  had  bound  the  President  to  become  a 
sobbyist  for  a  wretched  scheme,  instead  of 
being  disowned  and  reprimanded,  was  sent 
back  to  the  usurper  with  instructions  to  nego- 
tiate two  treaties,  one  for  the  annexion  of  the 
half  island  of  Dominica  and  the  other  for  the 
lease  of  the  bay  of  Saraana.  By  the  Consti- 
tution ot  the  United  Slates  "embassadors  and 
other  public  mitiisters"  are  appointed  by  the 
President,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent 
of  the  Senate;  but  our  Aid-de  Camp  had  no 
such  commission.  Presidential  prerogative 
empowered  him,  nor  was  naval  force  wanting. 
With  three  war  ships  at  his  disposal  he  entered 
upon  negotiation  with  Baez  and  obtained  the 
two  treaties.  Naturally  force  was  needed  to 
keep  the  usurper  in  power  while  he  sold  his 
country,  and  naturally  such  a  transaction  re- 
quired a  presideniial  Aid-de-Carap  unknown 
to  Constitution  or  law,  rather  than  a  civilian 
duly  appointed  according  to  both. 

PRESIDENTIAL  VIOLATIONS  OP  CONSITUTIONAL  AND 
INTKKNATIONAL  LAW. 

On  Other  occasions  it  has  been  my  solemn 
duty  to  expose  the  outrages  which  attended 
this  hateful  business,  where  at  each  step  we 
are  brought  face  to  face  with  presidential  pre- 
tension ;  first,  in  the  open  seizure  of  the  war 
powers  of  the  Government,  as  if  he  were 
already  Caesar,  forcibly  intervening  in  Domin 
ica  and  menacing  war  to  Hayti,  all  ot  which 
is  proved  by  the  official  reports  of  the  State 
Department  and  Navy  Department,  being 
nothing  less  than  war  by  kingly  prerogative  in 
defiance  of  that  distinctive  principle  of  repub- 
lican government,  first  embodied  in  our  Con- 
stitution, which  places  the  war  powers  under 
the  safeguard  of  the  legislative  branch,  making 
any  attempt  by  the  President  "  to  declare 
war"  an  undoubted  usurpation.  But  our 
President,  like  Gallio,  cares  for  none  of  these 
things.  The  open  violation  of  the  Consiiiu 
tion  was  naturally  followed  by  a  barelaced 
disregard  of  that  equality  of  nations,  which  is 
the  first  principle  ot  International  Law,  as  the 
equality  of  men  is  the  first  principle  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence  ;  and  this  sacred 
rule  was  set  aside  in  order  to  insult  and  men- 
ace Hayti,  doing  unto  the  Black  Republic 
what  we  would  nut  have  that  Republic  do  unto 
us,  nor  what  we  would  have  done  to  any  white 
Power.  To  these  eminent  and  most  painful 
presidential  pretensions,  the  first  adverse  to  the 
Constitution  and  the  second  adverse  to  Inter- 
national Law,  add  the  imprisonment  of  an 
Auiericau  citizen  in  Dominica  by  the  presi- 


dential confederate  Baez  for  fear  of  his  hos- 
tility to  the  treaty  if  he  were  allowed  to  reach 
New  York,  all  of  which  was  known  to  his 
subordinates,  Babcock  and  Cazneau,  and 
doubtless  to  himself.  What  was  the  liberty 
of  an  American  citizen  compared  with  the 
presidential  prerogative?  To  one  who  had 
defied  the  Constitution,  on  which  depends  the 
liberty  of  all,  and  then  defied  International  Law, 
on  which  depends  the  peaoe  of  the  world,  a 
single  citizen  immured  in  a  distant  dungeon 
was  of  small  moment.  But  this  is  only  an 
illustration.  Add  now  the  lawless  occupation 
of  the  Bay  of  Samana  for  many  months  after 
the  lapse  of  the  Treaty,  keeping  the  national 
flag  flying  there  and  assuming  a  territorial  sov- 
ereignty which  did  not  exist.  Then  add  the  pro- 
tracted support  of  Baez  in  his  usurped  power 
to  the  extent  of  placing  the  national  flag  at  his 
disposal,  and  girdling  the  island  with  our  ships 
of  war,  all  at  immense  cost  and  to  the  neglect 
of  other  service  where  the  Navy  was  needed. 

PRESIDENTIAL  EFFORTS  FOR  THE  CONTRIVANCE. 

This  strange  succession  of  acts,  which  if 
established  for  a  precedent  would  overturn 
Constitution  and  law,  was  followed  by  another 
class  of  presidential  manilestations,  being, 
first,  an  unseemly  importunity  of  .Senators 
during  the  pendency  of  the  Treaty,  visiting  the 
Capitol  as  a  lobbyist  and  summoning  them  to 
his  presence  in  squads  in  obvious  pursuance 
of  the  stipulation  made  by  his  Aid-de-Camp 
and  never  disowned  by  him,  being  intervention 
in  the  Senate,  reenforced  by  all  the  influence 
of  the  appointing  power,  whether  by  reward  or 
menace,  all  of  which  was  as  unconstitutional 
in  character  as  that  warlike  intervention  on 
the  island ;  and  then,  after  debate  in  the 
Senate,  when  the  treaty  was  lost  on  solemn 
vote,  we  were  called  to  witness  his  self-willed 
effrontery  in  proseeuting'the  fatal  error,  return- 
ing to  the  charge  in  his  Annual  ^Message  at 
the  ensuing  session,  insisting  upon  his  con- 
trivance as  nothing  less  than  the  means  by 
which  "our  large  debt  abroad  is  to  be  ulti- 
mately extinguished,"  and  gravely  charging 
the  Senate  with  "folly  "  in  rejecting  the  treaty, 
and  yet  while  making  this  astounding  charge 
against  a  coordinate  branch  of  Government, 
and  claiming  such  astounding  profits,  he 
blundered  geographically  in  describing  the 
prize. 

All  this  diversified  performance,  with  its 
various  eccentricity  of  effort,  failed.  The  re- 
port of  able  commissioners  transported  to 
the  island  in  an  expensive  war-ship  ended  in 
nothing.  The  American  people  rose  against 
the  undertaking  and  insisted  upon  its  aban- 
donment. By  a  message  charged  with  Parthian 
shafts  the  President  at  length  announced  that 
he  would  proceed  no  further  in  this  business. 
His  senatorial  partisans,  being  a  majority  of 
the  Chamber,  after  denouncing  those  who  had 


24 


exposed  the  business,  arrested  the  discussion, 
lu  obedience  to  iriepressible  sentiments,  and 
according  to  the  logic  of  uiy  life,  1  fell  it  my 
duty  to  speak,  but  the  President  would  not 
forgive  ine,  and  his  peculiar  representatives 
found  me  disloyal  to  the  party  which  I  had 
served  so  long  and  helped  to  found.  Then 
was  devotion  to  the  President  made  the  shib- 
boleth of  party. 

WHERE  WAS  THE  GHAND  INQUEST  OP  THE  NATION  ? 

Such  is  a  summary  of  the  St.  Domingo  busi- 
ness in  its  characteristic  features  ;  but  here  are 
transgressions  in  every  form — open  violation 
of  the  Constitution  in  more  than  one  essential 
requirement,  open  violation  of  International 
Law  iti  more  than  one  of  its  most  beautiful 
principles,  flagrant  insult  to  the  Black  Repub- 
lic with  menace  of  war,  complicity  with  tlie 
wrongful  imprisonment  of  an  American  citi- 
zen, lawless  assumption  of  territorial  sov- 
ereignty in  a  foreign  jurisdiction,  employment 
of  the  national  Navy  to  sustain  a  usurper, 
being  all  acts  of  substance,  maintained  by  an 
agent  calling  himself  "  Aid-de  Camp  of  Ulys- 
ses S.  Grant,  President  of  the  Unitt-d  States," 
and  stipulating  that  his  chief  should  play  the 
lobbyist  to  help  the  contrivance  through  Con- 
gress, then  urged  by  private  appeals  to  Sen- 
ators and  the  influence  of  the  appointing 
power  tyrannically  employed  by  the  presi- 
dential lobbyist,  and  finally  urged  anew  in  an 
Annual  Message  where  undisguised  insult  to 
the  Senate  vies  with  absurdity  in  declaring 
prospective  profits  and  with  geographical  igno- 
rance. Such,  in  brief,  is  this  multiform  dis- 
obedience, where  every  particular  is  of  such 
aggravation  as  to  merit  the  most  solemn  judg- 
ment. Why  the  Grand  Inquest  of  the  nation, 
which  brought  Andrew  Johnson  to  the  bar  of 
the  Senate,  should  have  slept  on  this  con- 
glomerate misdemeanor,  every  part  of  which 
was  offensive  beyond  any  technical  offense 
charged  against  his  predecessor,  while  it  had 
a  back-ground  of  nepotism,  gift-taking  offi- 
tially  compensated,  and  various  presidential 
pretensions  beyond  all  precedent — all  this  will 
be  one  of  the  riddles  of  American  history,  to 
be  explained  only  by  the  extent  to  which  the 
One  Man  Power  had  succeeded  in  subjugating 
Ihe  Government. 

INDIGNITY  TO  THE  AFEICiiN  RACE. 

Let  me  confess,  sir,  that,  while  at  each  stage 
I  have  felt  this  tyranny  most  keenly,  and  never 
doubted  that  it  ought  to  be  arrested  by  im- 
peachment, my  feelings  have  been  most  stirred 
by  the  outrage  to  llayti,  which,  besides  being 
a  wrong  to  the  Black  Republic,  was  an  insult 
to  the  colored  race  not  only  abroad  but  here 
at  home.  How  a  Chief  Magistrate  with  four 
millions  of  colored  lellow-citizens  could  have 
done  this  thing  passes  comprehension.  Did 
he  suppose  it  would  not  be  known?  Did  he 
iixiagiue  it  could  be  hushed  ia  olficial  pigeou- 


holes  ?  Or  was  he  insensible  to  the  true  char- 
acter of  his  own  conduct?  'J  he  facts  are 
indisputable.  For  more  than  two  generations 
Hnyii  had  been  independent,  eniided  under 
International  Law  to  equality  among  nations, 
and  since  emancipation  in  our  couniry,  com- 
mended to  us  as  an  example  of  self-gov- 
ernment, being  the  first  in  the  liistory  of  the 
African  race  and  the  promise  i-f  ihe  future. 
And  yet  our  President,  in  his  effort  to  secure 
that  Naboth's  vineyard  on  which  he  had  set 
his  eyes,  not  content  with  maintaining  the 
usurper  Baez  m  power,  occupying  the  liarbors 
of  Dominica  with  war-ships,  sent  other  war- 
ships, being  none  other  than  our  m(jst  power- 
ful monitor,  the  Dictator,  with  thefngaie  Sev- 
ern as  consort,  and  with  yet  other  monitors  in 
their  train  to  strike  at  the  independence  of  the 
Black  Republic  and  to  menace  it  wiih  war. 
Do  1  err  in  any  way,  am  1  not  entirely  right 
when  I  say  that  here  was  unpardonahle  oat- 
rage  to  the  African  race?  As  one  who  for 
years  has  stood  by  the  side  of  this  much- 
oppressed  people,  sympathizing  always  in 
their  woes  and  struggling  for  them,  I  fell  the 
blow  which  the  President  dealt,  and  it  became 
the  more  intolerable  from  the  lieariless  at- 
tempts to  defend  it.  Alas!  that  our  Presi- 
dent should  be  willing  to  wield  the  giant 
strength  of  the  great  Republic  in  trampling 
upon  the  representative  Government  of  the 
African  race,  Alas  I  that  he  did  not  see  the 
infinite  debt  of  friendship,  kindness,  and  pro- 
tection due  to  that  people,  so  that  instead  of 
monitors  and  war-ships,  breathing  violence, 
he  had  sent  a  messenger  of  peace  and  good 
will. 

This  outrage  was  followed  by  an  incident 
in  which  the  same  sentiments  were  revealed. 
Frederick  Douglass,  remarkable  for  his  intelli- 
gence as  for  his  eloquence,  and  always  agree- 
able in  personal  relations,  whose  only  ofiense 
is  a  skin  not  entirely  Caucasian,  was  selected 
by  the  President  to  accompany  the  St.  Do- 
mingo commissioners,  and  yet  ou  liis  return, 
and  almost  within  sight  of  the  Executive 
Mansion,  he  was  repelled  from  the  common 
table  of  the  mail  steamer  on  the  Potomac, 
where  his  companions  were  already  seated, 
and  thus  through  him  was  the  African  race 
insulted,  and  their  equal  rights  denied,  but 
the  President  whose  commission  he  had  borne 
neither  did  or  said  anything  to  right  this 
wrong,  and  a  few  days  later,  when  entertain- 
ing the  commissioners  at  the  Executive  Man- 
sion, actually  forgot  the  colored  orator  whose  , 
services  he  had  sought.  But  this  indignity  is 
in  unison  with  tlie  rest.  After  insulting  the 
Black  Republic,  it  is  easy  to  see  how  natural 
it  was  to  treat  wiih  itisensibiliiy  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  African  race. 

ALL  THESE  THINGS  IN  ISSUE  NOW. 

I     Here  I  stay  this  painful  catalogue  in  its 


25 


various  heads,  beginning  with  Nepotism  and 
Gift-taking  olticiH,lly  compensated,  and  ending 
in  the  contrivance  against  St.  Domingo  wiili 
indignity  to  the  Africafi  race,  not  because  it 
is  complete,  but  because  it  is  enough.  With 
sorrow  unspeakable  have  I  made  this  ex- 
posure of  pretensions  which  for  the  sake  of 
Republican  Iiistiturions  every  good  citizen 
should  wish  expunged  from  history  ;  but  I 
had  no  alternHtive,  The  President  hirast-lf 
insists  upon  glutting  them  it)  issue  ;  lie  will  not 
allow  them  to  be  forgot'en.  As  a  candidate 
for  reelection  he  invites  judgment,  while  par 
tisans  acting  in  his  behalf  make  it  absolutely 
necessary  by  the  brutality  of  their  assault  on 
faiihful  Republicans  unwilling  to  see  their 
party,  like  the  firesideiitial  otKce,  a  personal 
perquisite.  Jf  liis  partisans  are  exacting,  vin- 
dictive, and  unjust,  they  act  only  in  harmony 
"with  his  nature  loo  truly  represented  in  theui. 
Q'here  is  not  a  ring,  whether  military  or 
senatorial,  that  dofs  not  derive  its  distinctive 
character  from  himself  t  herefore  what  they 
do  and  what  they  sny  must  be  considered 
as  done  and  said  by  the  chieftain  they  serve. 
And  here  is  a  new  manifestation  o(  tliat  sov- 
eign  egfitisin  which  no  taciturnity  can  cover 
up,  and  a  new  motive  for  inquiry  into  its  per- 
nicious influence. 

THE  GREAT  PRESIDENTIAL  QUARRELER. 

Any  presentment  of  the  President  would  be 
imperfect  which  did  not  sliow  how  this  utigov- 
ernable  personal  it}'  breaks  forth  in  quarrel, 
making  him  the  grefit  [tresidential  quarreler  of 
our  liisiory.  As  in  nepotism,  gift-taking  offi- 
cially compensated,  and  presidential  preien- 
sioiis  generally,  here  a;j:ain  he  is  foremost,  h;iv- 
ing  quarreled  not,  only  more  than  any  other 
Piesident,  but  more  than  all  others  together 
from  George  Washitigton  to  himself.  His  own 
Cabinet,  the  Senate,  the  House  of  Itepresenta- 
tives,  the  diplomatic  service  and  the  civil  ser- 
vice getiorally,  all  have  their  victims,  nearly 
every  one  of  whom ,  besides  serving  the  Repub- 
lican party,  had  helped  to  make  him  Piesident. 
Nor  liave  Army  officers,  his  companions  in 
the  held,  or  even  liis  generous  patrons,  been 
exempt.  To  him  a  quarrel  is  not  only  a  con- 
stant necessity  hut  a  perquisite  of  office.  To 
nurse  a  quarrel,  like  tending  a  horse,  is  in  his 
list  of  presidential  duties.  How  idle  must  he 
be  should  the  woi ds  of  Sliakspeare  be  fulfilled, 
"I'his  dayall  quarrels  die. "  To  him  may  be 
applied  those  other  words  of  Shakspeare,  "as 
quarrelous  as  the  weasel." 

Evidently  our  President  has  never  read  the 
Eleventh  Commandment:  ''A  President  of 
the  Ufiited  States  shall  never  quarrel."  At 
least  he  lives  in  perpetual  violation  of  it,  lis- 
tening to  stoiies  from  horse  cars,  gobbling  the 
gossip  of  his  military  ling,  discoutsnig  on  itn- 
aginary  griefs,  and  nursing  an  unjust  anger. 
Ihe  elect  of  forty  millions  of  people  has  no 


right  to  quarrel  with  anybody.  His  position 
is  too  exalted.  He  cannot  do  it  without 
offense  to  the  requirements  of  patriotism, 
without  a  shock  to  the  decencies  of  life, 
without  a  jar  to  the  harmony  of  the  universe. 
If  lesson  were  needed  for  his  conduct  he 
might  find  it  in  that  King  of  France,  who,  on 
ascending  the  throne,  made  haste  to  declare 
that  he  did  not  remember  injuries  received  as 
Dauphin.  Perhaps  a  better  model  still  would 
be  Tancred,  the  acknowledged  type  of  the  per- 
fect Christian  knight,  who  "disdained  to  speak 
ill  of  whoever  it  might  be,  even  when  ill  had 
been  Sfioken  of  hitnself."  Our  soldier  Pres- 
ident could  not  err  in  following  this  knijihtly 
example.  If  this  were  too  much  then  at  least 
might  we  hope  that  he  would  consent  to  limit 
the  sphere  of  his  quarrelsome  operations,  so 
that  the  public  service  might  not  be  disturbed, 
or  this  be  assured.  In  every  quarrel  he  is  the 
offender,  according  to  the  fact,  as  according 
to  every  reasonable  presumption  ;  especially 
is  he  responsible  for  its  continuance.  The 
President  can  always  choose  his  relations  with 
any  citizen.  But  he  chooses  discord.  With 
the  arrogance  of  arms  he  resents  any  imped- 
iment in  his  path,  as  wheti,  in  the  spring  of 
1870,  without  allusion  to  himself,  I  felt  it  my 
duty  to  oppo'^e  his  St.  Domingo  contrivance. 
The  verse  of  Juvenal,  as  tratislated  by  Dryden 
{Satires,  III,  4G4,  4G8,)  describes  his  conduct. 

**  Poor  me  he  fights,  if  that  be  fighting,  where 
He  only  cudgels,  and  1  only  bear." 

"  Answer  or  answer  not,  'tis  all  the  same, 
lie  lays  me  on  and  makes  me  bear  the  blame. 

Another  scholarly  translator  gives  to  this 
description  of  the  presidential  quarrel  another 
form,  which  is  also  applicable  : 

"  If  that  be  deemed  a  qunrrel  where,  heaven  knows. 
Ho  only  gives  and  I  receive  tiie  blows — 
Across  my  path  he  strides  and  bids  me  stand  I — 
I  bow  obsequious  to  the  dread  command." 

If  the  latter  verse  is  not  entirely  true  in  my 
case,  something  must  be  pardoned  to  that 
liberty  in  which  I  was  born. 

Met)  take  their  places  in  history  according 
to  their  deeds.  The  flattery  of  life  is  then 
superseded  by  the  truthlul  record,  and  rulers 
do  not  escape  judgment.  Louis  X,  of  France, 
has  the  designation  of  Le  Ilutin  or  The 
Quarreler,"  by  which  he  is  known  in  the  long 
line  of  French  kinjrs.  And  so  in  the  long  line 
of  American  Chief  Magistrates  has  our  Pres- 
ident vindicated  for  himst  If  t he  same  title.  He 
must  wear  it.  The  French  monarch  was 
younger  than  our  President;  but  there  are 
other  points  in  his  life  which  are  not  without 
parallel.  According  to  a  contemporary  chron- 
icle he  was  "  well-disposed  luit  not  very  atten- 
tive to  the  neeiis  of  the  kingdom" — vnhntif 
rnais  pas  Men  euteiit/f  en  ce  qti  an  royaume  il 
J'alluit ;  and  then  again  it  was  his  rare  foriune 
to  sign  one  of  the  greatest  ordinances  of  French 


26 


history,  declaring  that  according  to  nature  all 
men  have  ihe  riglit  to  be  free;  but  the  Quar 
reler  was  in  no  respect  author  of  this  illus- 
trious act,  and  was  moved  to  its  adoption  by 
considerations  of  personal  advantage.  It  will 
be  for  impartial  history  to  determine  if  our 
Quarreler,  who  treated  his  great  office  as  a 
personal  perquisite,  and  all  his  life  long  was 
against  that  Enfranchisement  to  which  lie  put 
bis  name,  does  not  fall  into  the  same  category. 

DUTY  OK  THK  REPUBLICAN  PARTT. 

And  now  the  question  of  duty  is  distinctly 
presented  to  the  Republican  party.  I  like 
that  word.  It  is  at  the  mandate  of  duty  that 
we  must  act.  Do  the  presidential  pretensions 
merit  the  sanction  of  the  party  ?  Can  Kepub- 
licatis  without  departing  from  all  obligations, 
whether  of  party  or  patriotism,  recognize  our 
ambitious  Caesar  as  a  proper  representative? 
Can  we  take  the  fearful  responsibility  of  his 
prolonged  empire?  I  put  these  questions 
solemnly,  as  a  member  of  the  Republican 
party,  wiih  all  the  earnestness  of  a  life  devoted 
to  the  triumph  of  this  party,  but  which  I 
served  always  with  the  conviction  that  1  gave 
up  notliir)g  that  was  meant  for  country  or 
mankind.  With  me  the  party  was  country 
and  mankind;  but  with  the  adoption  of  all 
these  presidential  pretensions,  the  party  loses 
its  distinctive  character  and  drops  from  its 
sphere.  Its  creed  ceases  to  be  Republicanism 
and  becomes  Grantism  ;  its  members  cease  to 
be  Republicans  and  become  Grant-men.  It 
is  no  longer  a  political  party,  but  a  personal 
parly.  For  myself,  I  say  openly,  1  am  no 
man's  man  ;  nor  do  1  belong  to  any  personal 
party. 

ONE  TERM  FOR  PRKSIDKNT. 

The  attempt  to  change  the  character  of  the 
Republican  party  begins  by  assault  on  the 
principle  of  One  Term  for  President.  There- 
fore nmst  our  sup{>ort  of  this  requirement  be 
made  inaniff  St ;  and  here  we  have  the  testimony 
of  our  President  and  what  is  stronger,  his 
example,  showing  the  necessity  of  such  limita- 
tion. Authentic  report  attests  that  before  his 
nomination  he  declared  that  "  The  liberties 
of  the  country  cannot  be  maintained  without  a 
One  Term  amendment  of  the  Constitution." 
At  this  time  Mr.  Wade  was  pressing  this  very 
amend'nent.  Then  after  his  nomination,  and 
while  his  election  was  ppndir.g,  the  organ  of 
the  Republican  party  at  Washingtoti,  wiiere  he 
resided,  commended  him  constantly  as  faithful 
to  the  principle.  The  Morning  Chronicle  of 
June  3,  1800,  a'ter  the  canva-*s  hnd  commenced, 
proclaimed  of  the  candidate,  '"He  u,  moreover, 
an  adcocate  of  the  One  Term  principle  as  con- 
ducing towai  d  ihe  proper  administration  of  the 
law — a  principle  with  which  so  many  prominent 
Republicans  h;ive  identi6ed  themselves  that  it 
may  be  accepted  as  an  article  of  party  faith." 
Then  again,  July  14,  the  same  organ  insisted, 


"  Let  not  Congress  adjourn  without  passing  the 
One-Term  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 
There  has  never  been  so  favorable  an  opportun- 
ity. All  partiesarein  favor  of  it.  General  Grant 
is  in  favor  of  it.  The  party  that  su|)ports  Gen- 
eral Grunt  demands  it,  and  above  all  else  pub- 
lic morality  calls  for  it."  Consideriiii?  that  these 
pledijes  were  made  by  an  organ  of  the  pnrty, 
and  in  his  very  presence,  they  may  be  accepted 
as  prf)ceeding  from  liim.  His  name  must  be 
added  to  the  list  wirh  Andrew  Jackson.  William 
ilenry  Harrison,  Henry  Clay,  and  Benjamia 
F.  Wade,  all  of  whom  are  enrolled  against  the 
reeligibiiity  of  a  President. 

But  his  example  as  President  is  more  than 
his  testimony  in  showing  the  necessity  of 
this  limitation.  Andrew  Jackson  did  not  hes- 
itate to  say  that  it  was  required  in  order  to 
place  the  President  "  beyond  the  reach  of  any 
improper  influence  and  uncommitted  to  any 
other  course  than  the  strict  line  of  constitu- 
tional duty."  William  Henry  Harrison  fol- 
lowed in  declaring  that  with  the  adoption  of 
this  principle  "the  incumbent  would  devote 
all  his  time  to  the  public  interest  and  there 
would  be  no  cause  to  misrule  the  country." 
Henry  Clay  was  satisfied  after  much  observa- 
tion and  reflection  "  that  too  much  of  the 
time  the  thoughts  and  the  exertions  of  the 
incumbent  are  occupied  during  the  first  term 
in  securing  his  reelection."  Benjamin  F. 
Wade,  after  denouncing  the  re'eli>4ibility  of  the 
President,  said:  "There  are  defects  in  the 
Constitution,  and  this  is  among  the  most 
glaring." 

And  now  our  President  by  his  example, 
besides  his  testimony,  vindicates  all  these 
authorities.  He  makes  us  see  how  all  that  has 
been  predicted  of  Presidents  seeking  reelec- 
tion is  fulfilled  ;  how  this  desire  dominates 
official  conduct;  how  naturally  the  resources 
of  the  Government  are  employed  to  serve  a 
personal  purpose;  how  the  natiotial  interests 
are  subordinate  to  individual  advancement ; 
how  all  questions,  foreign  or  domesiic,  whether 
of  treaties  or  laws,  are  handled  with  a  view  to 
electoral  votes  ;  how  the  appointing  power 
lends  itself  to  a  selfish  will,  acting  no>v  by  tbe 
temptation  of  office  and  then  by  the  menace 
of  removal;  and,  since  every  officeholder  and 
every  office  seeker  has  a  brevet  commissisa  in 
the  predominant  political  party,  how  the  Pres- 
ident, desiring  reelection,  becomes  the  active 
head  of  three  cooperating  armies,  the  army 
of  officeholders  eighty  thousand  strong,  the 
larger  army  of  officeseekers,  and  the  army  of 
the  political  party,  the  whole  constituting  a 
consolidated  power  which  no  candida'e  can 
possess  without  peril  to  his  country.  Of  these 
vast  cociperaiing  armies  the  President  is  com- 
m  inder-in-chief  and  generalissimo.  'J'hrough 
these  he  holds  in  submission  even  Represent- 
atives and  Senators,  and  m;ikes  the  country 
his  vassal  with  a  cuudition  not  unlike  that  of 


27 


martial  law  where  the  disobedient  are  shot, 
while  the  vnritxi.s  ring^^  help  secure  the  prize. 
Thut  this  is  not  too  siroiig  appears  from  testi- 
mony before  a  S^-nute  Coiiiininee.  where  a  f)res- 
ideiitiMl  lieuteriHiU  boldly  denounced  an  eminent 
New  York  ciiizen,  who  was  a  prominent  can- 
didate for  Governor,  as  "  obnoxious  to  General 
Grant,"  and,  then  with  an  effrontery  like 
the  presidential  pretension,  announced  lliat 
''President  Grant  whs  the  representative  and 
bead  of  tlie  llepublican  party,  and  ail  cood 
Republicans  should  support  him  iti  all  ids 
measures  and  H[ipointrnents.  and  any  one  who 
did  noi  do  it  sliould  be  cru.shed  uut.'^  Sucii 
thitigs  teach  how  wise  were  those  statesmen 
who  would  not  subject  the  Pre->idenr,  to  the 
temptation  or  even  the  suspicion  of  using  his 
vast  powers  in  promoting  personal  ends. 

Unquestionably  the  Que  Man  Power  has  in- 
creased latterly  lieyond  example,  owing  partly 
to  the  greater  facilities  of  intercourse,  espe- 
cially i)y  telej^raph,  so  that  the  whole  country 
is ea-ily  reached  ;  partly  tu inifirovemeuts  it;  or-  i 
ganizaiion.  by  which  distant  f. laces  are  brought  ! 
into  uniiy  ;  and  partly  through  the  protracted  ; 
prevalence  of  the  military  spirit  created  by  the  j 
war.      There  was  a  time  in  English  history 
when  the  House  of  Commons,  on  the  motion  \ 
of  the  f.imous  lawyer,  Mr.  Dunning,  adopted  ! 
the  resolution:  "That  the  influence  of  the  j 
Crown  has  increased,  is  increasing,  and  ought  j 
to  be  diminished.''    The  same  declaration  is  ' 
needed  with  regard  to  the  President  ;  and  the 
very  words  of  the  parliamentary  pa' riot  may 
be  repealed.    In  his  memorable  speech,  Mr. 
Dunrnni^,  aftersayingthat  hcdid  not  recfufion 
proof  idle  to  require,'*  declared  tliat  the  ques-  } 
tion  '"must  be  decided  by  the  consciences  of  | 
those  who,  as  a  jury,  were  called  to  determine  | 
■what  Was  or  was  not  within  their  own  knowl-  j 
edge,"     (llansaid,  Fatiiamentavy  Uistory,  \ 
April.  ITSU,  Vol.  XXI,  p.  317.)    It  was  on  \ 
ground  of  notoriety  cognizable  to  all  that  he  ! 
acted.    And  preci-^ely  on  this  ground,  but  also  : 
with  specific  proofs,  do  I  insist  tiiat  iiie  influ- 
ence of  the  President  has  increased,  is  increas- 
ing, and  ought  to  be  diminished.  But  in  this 
excellent  work,  well  woriliy  the  best  efforts  of 
all,  nothing  is  more  important  than  the  limit- 
ation to  (me  term.  ' 

■J'here  is  a  demand  for  reform  in  the  Civil  | 
Service,  and  the  President  formally  adopts  this  ! 
demand  ;  but  he  neglects  the  first  step,  which  j 
depends  only  on  himself.    From  this  we  may  ' 
judge  his  little  earnestness  in  the  cause.     Be-  | 
yond  all  question.  Civil  Service  Reform  must  j 
begin  by  a  limitation  of  the  President  to  one  | 
term,  so  that  the  tem{)taiiou  to  use  the  appoint-  1 
ing  power  for  personal  ends  may  disappear  from  ' 
our  system,  and  tliis  great  disturbittg  force 
cease  to  exi'^t.    If  the  President  is  sincere  for 
reform,  it  will  be  easy  for  him  to  set  the  exam- 
ple by  declaring  again  his  adhesion  to  the  Oue- 


Term  principle.  But  even  if  he  fails  we  must 
do  our  duty. 

Therefore,  in  opposing  the  prolonged  power 
of  the  present  incumbent,  I  be^iii  by  insisiing 
that,  for  the  good  of  the  country  and  wiihout 
reference  to  any  personal  failure,  no  President 
should  be  a  candidate  for  reelection  ;  and  it  ia 
our  duty  now  to  set  an  example  wonhy  of  Re- 
publican Insiiuitions.  In  the  name  of  the  One- 
Term  principle,  once  recognized  by  him,  and 
wliich  needs  no  other  evidence  of  its  necessity 
than  his  own  Presidency,  1  protest  against  his 
attempt  to  ob  ain  another  lease  of  power. 
But  this  protest  is  on  the  threshold. 

UXKIT.VESS  FOR  THE  PRESIDENTIAL  OFFICE. 

I  protest  against  him  as  radically  unfit  for 
the  presidential  office,  beiui^  esseniiaily  mili- 
tary in  nature,  without  experience  in  civil  life, 
without  aptitude  for  civil  dut'.es,  and  without 
knowledge  of  republican  institutions,  ail  of 
which  is  perfecily  apparetit,  unless  we  are 
ready  to  assume  that  the  matters  and  things 
set  forth  to-day  are  of  no  account — and  then 
in  furtlier  support  of  the  candidate,  boldly 
declare  that  nepotism  in  a  President  is  noih- 
ing,  that  gift-taking  with  repayment  in  official 
patronage  is  nothiui^,  that  violation  of  the 
Constitution  and  of  law  international  and  mu- 
nicipal is  nothing,  ihat  indignity  to  the  African 
race  is  nothing,  that  quarrel  wiih  political  as- 
sociates is  notliing,  and  that  all  his  presiden- 
tial pretensions  in  their  motley  a^^gregaiion, 
being  a  new  Caesarism  or  personal  govern- 
ment, are  nothing.  But  if  these  are  all  noth- 
ing, then  is  the  Republican  f)arry  nothing^ 
nor  is  there  any  safeguard  for  republicaa 
institutions. 

APOLOGIES. 

Two  apologies  1  hear. 

The  first  is  that  he  means  well  and  errs  from 
want  of  knowledge.  This  is  not  much.  It  was 
said  of  Louis  the  Quarreller,  tiiat  he  meant 
well;  nor  is  there  a  slate  headstone  in  any 
village  burial  ground  that  does  not  record  as 
much  of  the  humble  lodger  beneath.  Some- 
thing more  is  needed  for  a  President.  Nor 
can  we  afford  to  perpetuate  power  in  a  ruler 
who  errs  so  much  from  ignorance.  Char.ty 
for  the  past  I  concede  ,  but  no  investiture  for 
the  future. 

The  other  apology  is  that  his  Presidency  has 
been  successful.  How?  When?  Where?  Not 
to  him  can  be  attributed  that  general  prosperity 
whi.  h  is  the  natural  outgrowth  of  our  people 
and  country,  for  his  contribution  is  not  traced  in 
the  abounding  resuit.  Oar  golden  fi-lds.  pro- 
ductive mines,  busy  industry,  diversified  com*, 
merce  owe  nothing  to  him.  Show,  then,  his 
success.  Is  it  in  the  finances?  The  national 
debt  has  been  reduced  ;  but  not  to  so  large 
an  amount  as  by  Andrew  Johnson  in  the 
same  space  of  time.  Litile  merit  is  due  to 
either,  tor  each  employed  the  means  allowed 


28 


by  Congress.     To  the  American  people  is 
this  reduction  due,  and  not  to  any  President. 
And  while  our  President  in  this  respect  is  no 
better  than  his  predecessor,  he  can  chiiin  no 
merit  for  any  systetnatic  effort  to  reduce  taxa- 
tion or  restore  specie  payments.  Perhaps, 
then,  it  is  in  foreign  relations  that  he  claims 
the  laurels  he  is  to  wear.    Knowing  some 
thing  of  these  from  careful  study  and  years  of 
practical   acquaintance,  I   am  bound  to  say 
that  never  betbre  has  their  management  been 
80  wanting  in  ability  and  so  al)solutely  without 
cliaracter.      Wirh  so  much  pretension  an<l  so 
liitle  knowledge,  how  could  it  be  otherwise? 
Here  .he  President  touches  noiiiing  which  he  | 
does  not  mnddl'-.    In  every  directioti  is  mud-  j 
die — muddle  with  S[)ain,  muddle  with  CuIm, 
muddle  with  the  Black  itepublic,  muddle  with 
distant  Corea.  muddle  with  Venezuela,  mud 
die  with  Russia,  muddle  with  Kui^land — on  all 
sides  one  diversilied  muddle.    If  there  is  not 
muddle  with  Germany  and  France,  it  must  be 
from  their  forbearance.    To  this  condition  are 
we  reduced.    When  before  in  our  history  have 
we  reached  any  such  bathos  as  that  to  wliich 
we  have  been  carried  in  our  questions  with 
England?    Are  the^e  the  laurels  for  a  presi- 
dential candidate?   But  where  are  they?  Are 
they  found  on  the  Indian  frontier?    Let  the 
cry  of  massacre  and  blood  from  that  distant 
region  answer.    Are  they  in  reform  of  the  civil 
service?    But  here  the  initial  point  is  the  lim- 
itation of  the  President  to  one  term,  so  that  j 
he  may  be  placed  above  temptation;  but  this  ' 
be  opposes.    Evidently  he  is  no  true  retbrmer. 
Are  these  laurels  found  in  the  administration 
of  the  Departments?     Let  the  discreditable 
sale  of  artns  to  France  in  violation  of  neutral 
duties  and  of  municipal  statute  be  the  answer, 
and  let  the  custom  houses  of  New  York  and  ' 
New  Orleans  with  iheir  tales  of  favoritism  and 
of  nepotism,  and  with  their  prostitution  as 
agencies,  mercenary  and  political,  echo  back 
the  answer,  while  senatorial  committees  organ- 
ized conirary  lo  a  cardinal  principle  of  Parlia- 
mentary Law  as  a  cover  to  these  scandals,  tes-  i 
titj  also.     And  again  hit  the   War  Depart-  j 
ment  recall  the  disappearance  of  imponant  ' 
arcliives,  bearing  on  an  important  event  of  I 
the  war.   80  that  empty  boxes  remain,  like  a 
coffin  wiihout  the  corpse.     Where,  then,  are  [ 
the  laurels?     At  last  I  find  them  fresh  and  1 
brilliant  in  the  harmony  which  the  President  | 
has  preserved  among  Republicans.    Harmony  j 
do  I  say  ?  This  should  have  been  his  congeni.il  j 
task  ;  nor  would  any  aid  or  homage  of  mine  | 
•been  wanting.    But  instead  he  has  organized  1 
discord  operating  through  a  succession  of  j 
rings,  and  for  laurels  we  find  only  weeds  and 
thistles. 

But  I  hear  that  he  is  successful  in  the  States 
once  in  rebellion.  Strange  that  this  should 
be  said  while  we  are  harrowed  by  the  reports 


of  Ku  Klux  outrages.  Here,  as  in  payins  the 
national  debt,  Congress  has  been  the  effect- 
ive power.  Even  the  last  extraordinary  meas- 
ure became  necessary,  in  my  judgment,  to 
supplement  his  little  efficiency.  Had  the  Pres- 
ident put  into  the  protection  of  the  colored 
people  at  the  South  half  the  effort  and  earn- 
est will  wiih  which  he  maintained  his  St. 
Domingo  contrivance,  the  murderous  Ku  Klux 
would  have  been  driven  from  the  Held  and 
peace  assured.  Nor  has  he  ever  exhibited  to 
the  colored  people  any  true  sympathy.  His 
conduct  to  Frederick  Douglass  on  his  return 
from  St.  Domingo  is  an  illusiraiion,  and  so 
also  was  his  answer  to  the  committee  of  colored 
fellow-citizens  seeking  his  countenance  for 
the  pending  measure  of  Civil  Rights.  Some 
thought  him  indifferent;  others  found  hirn 
insulting.  Then  came  his  recent  letter  to  the 
great  meeting  at  Washington,  May  9,  1872, 
called  to  assert  these  rights,  where  he  could 
say  nothing  more  than  this:  "1  beg  to  assure 
you,  however,  that  I  sympath'ze  most  cordially 
in  any  effort  to  secure  for  all  our  people  of 
whatever  race,  nativity  or  color,  the  exercise 
of  those  rights  to  which  every  citizen  shuidd 
be  entitled.^'  Of  course  everybody  is  in  favor 
of  ''the  rights  to  which  every  citizen  should 
be  entiiled."  But  what  are  these  rights? 
And  this  meaningless  juggle  of  words,  entirely 
worthy  of  the  days  of  slaverv,  is  all  that  is 
vouchsafed  by  a  Republican  President  for  the 
equal  rights  of  his  colored  fellow-citizens. 

1  dismiss  the  apologies  with  the  conclusion 
that  in  the  matters  to  which  they  inviie  atten- 
tion, his  Presidency  is  an  enormous  failure. 

THE  PRESIDENT  AS  CANDIDATE. 

Lookingat  his  daily  life  as  it  becomes  known 
through  tne  press  or  conversation,  his  chief 
einpl<)v  ment  seems  the  dispensation  of  patron- 
age, unless  society  is  an  employment.  For 
tins  he  is  visited  daily  by  Senators  and  Repre- 
sentatives bringing  distant  constituents.  The 
Executive  Mansion  has  become  that  famous 
treasury  tr(mgh,  described  so  well  by  an  early 
Congressional  orator  : 

"Such  running,  such  jostling,  such  wrigrgling,  such 
clamberiiis;  over  one  another's  baL-ks,  sucli  s<iue:il  ing 
because  the  tub  is  so  narrow  an  l  tlie  company  is 
so  crowded." — Speech  of  Josinh  Qauicy,  Jaaaary  30, 
1811.  Annuls  of  CoiigresH,  page  851. 

To  sit  bt-hind  is  the  Presidr^ntial  occupation, 
watching  and  feeding  the  animals.  1  f  this  were 
an  aniu-^ement  only  it  mit;ht  be  pardoned  ;  but 
it  must  be  seen  in  a  more  serious  li;?ht.  Some 
nations  are  governeil  by  the  sword,  in  other 
words  by  central  force  ccramau'ling  obedience. 
Our  President  governs  by  offices,  in  other  words 
by  the  app<)inting  povver,  being  a  central  force 
t)v  which  he  coerces  obedience  to  his  personal 
will.  Let  a  Senator  or  Representative  hesi- 
tate in  the  support  of  his  autocracy  or  doubt 
if  he  merits  a  second  term,  and  forthwith 


29 


Bome  distnnt,  consul  or  postmaster,  appointed 
by  his  influence,  begins  to  irniuble.  The 
*'Head  Centre"  makes  himself  fVit  to  the 
most  distant  circumferpnce.  Cjiti  such  tyrnnny. 
where  the  military  spirit  of  our  President  finds 
a  congenial  field,  be  permitted  ro  endure?  ' 

In  adopting  him  as  a  candidate  r<^r  reelec- 
tion we  underfalie  to  vindicate  his  Presidency, 
and  adopt  in  all  things  the  insulting,  incapable, 
aid-de-campish    dictatorship  winch   he  has 
inaugurated.     Presenting  his  name  we  vouch 
for  his  fitness,  not  onlv  in  original  nature,  but 
in  experience  of  civil  life,  in  ap'i'ude  for  civil 
duties,  in  knowledge  of  repul)lican  institu- 
tions and  elevation  of  purpose;  and  we  must 
be  ready  to  defend  openly  what  he  has  openly 
dotie.  Can  Uepubiicans  honestly  do  this  thing  ? 
Let  it  be  said  that  he  is  not  only  the  greatest 
nepotist  among  Presidents,  but  greater  than 
all   others   toge'her,  and    what  Republican 
can  reply?    Let  it  be  said  that  he  is  not  only  | 
the  greatest  gift-taker  atnong  Presidents,  but 
the  only  one  who  repaid  his  patrons  at  the 
public  expense,  and  what  Republican  can  re- 
ply?   Let  it  be  said  that  he  has  openly  vio 
lated  the  Constitution  and  International  Law, 
in  the  prosecution  of  a  wretched  contrivance 
against  the  peace  of  St.  Domingo,  and  what 
Republican  can  reply?    Let  it  be  said  that 
wit-Ming  the  power  of  the  Great  Republic  be  j 
has  insulted  the  Black  Republic  witli  a  menace 
of  war,  involving  iutU^iiiity  to  the  Afiican  race, 
and  what  Republican  can  reply?    Let  it  be  said 
that  he  has  set  up  presidential  pretensions  with- 
out number,  constituting  an  undoubted  Ccssar- 
ism  or  personal  government,  and  what  Reiiub 
lican  can  reply  ?    And  let  it  be  added  t!hat, 
unconscious  of  all  this  misrule,  he  quarrelfe  'j 
without  cause  even  with  political  supporters  !! 
and  on  such  a  scale  as  to  become  the  greatest  j 
presidential  quarreler  of  our  history,  quarrel-  i 
ing  more  than  all  other  Presidents  together,  I 
and  what  Republican  can  reply?    It  will  not  i 
be  enough  to  say  that  he  was  triumphant  in  ! 
war,  as  Scipio,  the  victor  of  Uannibal,  re-  | 
minded  the  Roman  people  that  on  this  day  | 
he  conquered  at  Zaina.     Others  have  been  | 
triumphant  in  war  and  failed  in  civil  life,  as  | 
Marlborough,  whose  heroic  victoiies  seemed  [ 
unaccountal)le  in  the  frivolity,  the  ignorance,  | 
and  the  heartlessness  of  his  pretended  states-  j 
manship.    To  Washington  was  awarded  that  i 
rarest  tribute,  ''first  in  war,  first  in  peace,  j 
and  first  in  the  hearts  of  his  countrymen."  i 
Of  oair  President  it  will  be  said  willingly,  ! 
''first  in  war,"  but  the  candid  historian  will  | 
add,^  ''first  in  nepotism,  first  in  gift-taking  j 
repaid  by  official  patronage,  first  in  presi-  j 
dent:al  pretensions,  and  first  in  quarrel  with  I 
his  countrvmen."  j 

Anxiously,  earnestly,  the  country  asks  for  ' 
reform,  and  stands  tip-toe  to  greet  the  com- 
ing.   But  how  ex[»ect  reform  fn-.m  a  President  |i 
Viho  needs  it  so  much  himself?    Who  shall  11 


reform  the  reformer?  So,  also,  doe.9  the  coun- 
try ask  for  purity.  But  is  it  not  vain  to  seek 
this  boon  from  on*^  whose  presideiitinl  pre'en- 
sions  are  so  demoralizing?  Who  shall  purify 
the  purifier?  The  country  asks  for  relbruj  in 
the  civil  service,  but  how  expect  any  such 
change  from  one  who  will  not  allow  ihe  pres- 
idential office  to  be  secured  against  its  worst 
temptation  ?  The  country  desires  an  exam- 
ple forthe  youth  of  the  land,  where  intelligence 
shall  l)lend  with  character  and  both  be  elevated 
by  a  constant  sense  of  duty  with  unseifi-h  de- 
votion to  the  public  weal.  But  Iioa-  accord 
this  place  to  a  President  who  makes  his  great 
office  a  plaything  and  percpiisite,  wliile  his 
highest  industry  is  in  quarrel'ug?  Since  San- 
cho  Panza  at  Barataria  no  Governor  h  is  done 
so  well  for  his  relations  at  the  expense  of  his 
country,  atid  if  aiiy  other  has  made  Cabinet 
apf)ointments  the  return  for  personal  t'avors, 
liifi  iia;ne  has  di-0[)ped  out  of  history.  A  man 
is  known  by  his  acts  ;  so,  also,  by  the  company 
lie  keeps.  And  is  not  our  President  knowQ 
by  his  intimacy  with  those  who  are  by  words 
of  distrust?  But  all  these  by-words  look  to 
another  term  for  perpetuation  of  iheir  power. 
Therefore,  for  the  sake  of  reform  and  purity, 
which  is  a  longing  of  the  people,  and  also  that 
the  Chief  Magistrate  may  be  an  example,  we 
must  seek  a  retnedy. 

See  for  one  moment  how  pertiicious  must 
he  the  presiden'ial  examt^le.  Fir.^t  in  place, 
his  personal  influence  is  fir-reaching  beyond 
that  of  any  other  citizen.  What  he  does  others 
will  do.  What  he  fails  to  do  others  will  fail 
to  do.  His  standard  of  conduct,  will  be  ac- 
cepted at  least  by  his  political  supporter."?. 
His  measure  of  industry  an  i  his  sense  of  duty 
I  will  be  the  pattern  tor  the  country.  If  he  ap- 
points re'a'ions  to  office  and  ref)ay3  gifts  by 
official  patronage  making  his  Presidency.  "  a 
great  Gift  Enterprise,"  may  not  every  office- 
liolder  do  likewise,  each  in  his  sphere,  so  that 
nepotism  and  gift-taking  official;\  compensated 
will  be  general  and  gift  enterprises  be  multi- 
plied indefinitely  in  tlie  public  service?  If 
he  treats  his  trust  as  plaything  and  perquisite, 
why  ma>  tiot  every  otHce-holder  do  the  same? 
If  he  disreg;irds  constitution  and  law  iu  the 
pursuit  of  personal  obj'^crs  how  can  we  expect 
a  just  suboidinatioii  Irom  othets?  If  he  sets 
up  preten.-ions  without  number,  repugnant  to 
liepublicau  institutions,  must  not  tiie  good 
cause  sut!er?  If  he  is  stubborn,  obstinate,  and 
perverse  are  not  stubb  )rnness,  obstinacy  and 
perversity  commended  for  imitation  ?  If  he 
insults  and  wrongs  associates  in  official  trust, 
who  is  safe  from  the  malignant  influence  hav- 
itig  its  propulsion  from  the  Executive  Man- 
sion ?  If  he  fra'erirzes  with  jobbers  and  Hes- 
sians, where  is  the  limit  to  the  demoralization 
that  must  ensue  ?  Necessarilv  the  puldic  ser- 
vice takes  its  character  from  its  elected  chief 
and  the  whole  country  reflects  the  President 


30 


His  example  is  u  law.    But  a  bad  example 
must  be  corrected  as  a  bad  law. 

APPEAL  TO  THE  REPUBLICAN  PARTY. 

To  tbe  Republican  parfy.  devoted  to  idea>^ 
and  principles,  I  turn  now  with  more  ihaii 
ordinary  solicitude.  Not  willii:g!y  can  I  see  it 
Saciiticed.  Not  without  earne.vt  effdrt  atrairist 
the  betrjiyal  can  I  suffer  its  ideas  and  princi- 
ples 10  be  I'^st  in  the  personal  pretensions  of 
one  man.  B'>th  the  old  parties  are  in  a  crisis, 
with  ihis  ditference  between  the  two.  'l"he 
Democracy  is  dissolvins; :  the  itepublican  party 
is  being  absorbed.  The  Democracy  is  falling 
apart,  thus  visibly  losing  vs  vital  unity  ;  the 
llepuhlican  party  is  submitting  to  a  pers'mal 
influence,  thus  visibly  losing  its  viial  charac- 
ter. The  Democracy  is  ceasing  to  exist,  'i'he 
Kepublican  party  is  losing  its  identi'y.  Let 
the  process  be  completed,  and  it  will  he  no 
longer  that  liepublicati  jiarty  which  I  helped  ' 
to  found  and  have  always  served,  but  onlv  a 
personal  party,  while  instead  of  those  ideas 
and  principles  which  we  have  been  so  proud 
to  uphold  will  be  presidential  pretensions, 
and  instead  of  Ivepublicanisin  there  will  be 
nothing  but  Grantism. 

Political  parties  are  losing  their  sway. 
Higher  than  party  are  country  and  the  duty  to 
save  it  fi  om  Caesar.  The  caucus  is  at  last  un 
derstood  as  a  political  engine,  moved  by  wire- 
pullers. :itid  it  becomes  more  insupportable  in 
j)roportion  as  directed  to  personal  ends  ;  nor  is 
Its  character  changed  when  called  a  National 
Convt^ntion.  Here  too  are  wire-pullers,  and 
when  the  great  Officeholder  and  the  great 
Officeseekcr  arc  one  and  the  same,  it  is  easy  to 
see  how  naturally  the  engine  responds  to  the 
Central  touch.  A  polincal  convention  is  an 
agency  and  convenience,  but  never  a  law.  least 
01  all  a  ucbpotism  ;  and  when  ii  seeks  to  impose 


a  candidate  whose  name  is  a  synonym  of  pre- 
tensions unrejtublican  in  character  and  hostile 
to  gocd  government,  it  will  be  for  earnest 
ltepul)licans  to  consider  well  how  clearly  party 
is  subordinate  to  country.  Such  a  nominaiiua 
c^n  have  no  just  obligaiion.  'i'herefore  wii h 
unspeakable  interest  will  the  country  watch 
the  National  Convention  at  Philadelphia.  It 
may  be  an  assembly  (and  such  is  my  hope!) 
where  ideas  and  principles  are  above  ail  per- 
sonal pretensions,  atid  the  unity  of  the  party 
is  symbolized  in  the  candidate  or  it  may  add 
another  to  presidental  rings,  beiiig  an  expan- 
sion of  the  miljtaiy  ring  at  the  Executive 
Mansion,  the  senatorial  rinj;  in  this  Chamber, 
and  the  political  ring  in  the  custom  houses 
of  New  York  and  New  Orleans.  A  National 
Convention  whi(  h  is  a  presidental  ring  cannot 
represent  the  lle[>ublicun  party. 

Much  rather  would  i  see  the  party,  to  which 
I  am  dedicated,  under  the  image  of  a  life-boat 
not  to  be  sunk  by  wind  or  wave.  How  often 
have  1  said  this  to  cheer  my  comrades.  1  do 
not  fear  the  Democratic  party.  Nothing  from 
them  can  harm  our  life-boat.  But  I  do  tear  a 
quarrelsome  pilot,  unused  to  the  sea,  but  pre- 
tentious in  command,  who  occupies  himself  in 
loading  aboard  his  own  unserviceable  relauons 
and  personal  patrons  while  he  drives  aw;iy  the 
experienced  seamen  who  know  the  craU  and 
her  voj  au'e.  Here  is  a  peril  which  no  life-boat 
can  s'and. 

Meanwhile  I  wait  the- determination  of  the 
National  Convention,  where  are  delegates 
from  my  own  much  honored  Commonwealth 
with  whom  I  rejoice  to  act.  Not  without 
anxiety  do  I  wait,  but  with  the  earnest  hope 
that  the  Convention  will  bring  the  ltef)ublicaQ 
party  into  ancient  harmony,  saving  it  espe- 
cially from  the  suicidal  lolly  of  an  issue  on  the 
personal  pretensions  of  one  man. 


\ 


